/:^.5 


LIBRARY  OF   THE  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 


PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


BX  7232  .D4  1870 

"\ 

Dexter,  Henry  Martyn,  1821- 
1890. 

The  church  polity  of  the 
Pi  1 ar ims^ 

/  V 


DtC  3  1923      I 


THE 


CHURCH  POLITY  OF  THE  PILGRBIS 


THE  POLITY  OF 


THE   NEW   TESTAMENT. 


BY 

HENRY  M.   DEXTER. 


WITH   AN    INTRODUCTION    BY  HON.   R.  A.   CHAPMAN, 

CHIEF  JUSTICE  OF  THE  SUPREME  COURT  OF  MASSACHUSETTS. 


BOSTON  : 

CONGREGATIONAL  PUBLISHING   SOCIETY. 

ii>70. 


[FIFTY  COPIES  PPvINTED.J 


INTRODUCTION. 


Boston,  June  30,  1870. 
My  Dear  Sir,  —  When  the  articles  containing  the 
substance  of  this  little  work  were  first  published  in  "  The 
Congregationalist  and  Recorder,"  I  read  them  with  much 
interest,  and  expressed  to  you  a  hope  that  they  might  be 
re-published  in  a  more  permanent  form.  The  practical 
importance  of  the  subject  of  church  government  and  pol- 
ity appears  to  me  to  be  vastly  greater  than  many  people 
seem  to  suppose.  Congregational  government  is  radically 
different  from  hierarchy  in  any  of  its  forms.  The  former 
regards  the  members  of  a  Christian  church  as  capable  of 
managing  the  affairs  of  the  church :  while  the  latter  re- 
gards them  as  incompetent  to  manage  those  affairs;  not 
capable  of  deciding  upon  the  admission,  discipline,  or  ex- 
pulsion of  their  fellow-members,  nor  of  maintaining  fel- 
lowship with  other  churches.  It,  therefore,  reduces  them 
to  the  condition  of  a  governed  class;  their  duty  being  sim- 
ply to  obey  the  hierarchy,  whose  competency  to  govern 
them  is  assumed.     You  have  shown  which  of  these  sys- 

iii 


terns  of  government  is  in  conformity  with  the  teachings 
of  the  New  Testament.  And  if  we  go  farther  back,  and 
consider  the  fundamental  object  of  Christianity,  we  are 
led  to  the  same  result.  Christ's  purpose  manifestly  was 
to  renovate  and  elevate  mankind  by  acting  upon  them  in- 
dividually. He  taught  the  value  of  man  as  an  individual ; 
exposed  the  true  character  of  the  evil  that  is  in  him  and 
tends  to  degrade  him ;  and  his  plan  of  renovation  begins 
with  faith  in  himself  personally,  and  proceeds  with  attach- 
ment and  obedience  to  himself.  The  organization  and 
observances  which  he  prescribed  to  his  followers  were 
very  simple ;  and  as  the  preservation  and  propagation  of 
his  system  were  to  be  not  by  coercion,  but,  so  far  as  man's 
agency  is  concerned,  principally  by  teaching  and  example, 
very  little  of  church  government  was  needed,  and  that  lit- 
tle could  be  managed  by  a  local  assembly.  He  regarded 
all  men  as  brethren,  and  all  of  them  erring  and  sinful  ; 
but  the  sin  towards  which  he  manifested  a  special  detesta- 
tion was  the  lust  and  abuse  of  official  power. 

The  tendency  of  a  hierarchy  would  naturally  be  adverse 
to  his  system ;  and  knowing  how  strong  the  lust  of  power 
is  in  the  human  heart,  and  foreseeing  its  effects,  we  should 
naturally  expect  that  he  would  give  a  solemn  command, 
like  that  which  he  gave  when  he  spoke  of  the  exercise  of 
lordship  and  authority  by  princes  and  great  men  among 
the  Gentiles,  and  peremptorily  declared,  "  So  shall  it  not  be 


amon;jj  you."  It  was  addressed  to  those  who  were  to  be 
the  teachers  and  preacliers  of  his  system  ;  and,  had  it  been 
obeyed  after  the  days  of  the  apostles,  the  tendency  would 
have  been  to  purify  and  ennoble  that  class  of  his  followers, 
by  saving  them  from  the  degrading  temptation  to  claim 
lordship  and  authority  over  their  brethren. 

Our  ancestors  came  here  fresh  from  the  experience  of 
hierarchal  oppression  and  cruelty.  Their  ministers  were 
learned  men,  and  well  acquainted  with  ecclesiastical  his- 
tory. They  knew  how  early  the  lust  of  power  began  to 
operate  upon  Christian  ministers,  and  how  it  grew  till  the 
prominent  feature  of  ecclesiastical  history,  through  all 
the  intervening  ages,  had  become  a  history  of  the  oppres- 
sion and  degradation  of  the  laity  by  the  hierarchy.  It  is 
a  frightful  history  for  a  layman  to  read. 

Hierarchy  had  been  a  blight  upon  human  liberty  and 
progress,  and  upon  Christianity  itself.  They  knew  that 
its  authority  rested  upon  tradition;  and  therefore  they 
went  behind  tradition,  to  the  New  Testament  itself. 
There  they  found,  as  you  find,  popular  sovereignty  ;  and, 
renouncing  all  claim  to  lordship  and  authority,  they 
taught  their  brethren  their  rights  and  their  duties  in  this 
respect.  The  introduction  of  this  new  system  of  govern- 
ment gave  not  only  a  new  position,  but  naturally  tended 
to  give  a  new  elevation  of  character,  to  the  brethren. 
They  were  no  longer  mere  subjects,  living  under  the  die- 


tation  of  office-holders,  but  themselves  possessed  the  rights 
of  sovereignty.  As  the  New  Testament  expresses  it, 
thej-were"a  royal  priesthood,"  not  subject  to  a  human 
priest;  "kings  and  priests  unto  God,"  having  equal 
rights  among  themselves  ;  and  this  is  the  very  essence  of 
a  pure  democracy. 

Attached  to  the  rights  of  this  common  sovereignty  are 
its  dignity,  its  responsibilities,  and  its  duties  ;  and  a 
religious  regard  for  them  tends  to  elevate  men  towards 
their  highest  capabilities.  It  teaches  them  the  need  of 
universal  education.  Thus  it  originated  the  common 
school,  which  put  education  under  the  control  of  the 
people.  It  fits  them  for  self  government,  and  thus  it 
led  to  the  establishment  of  our  civil  government  based 
on  popular  sovereignty.  It  is  hostile  to  every  form  of 
monarchy  and  aristocracy,  as  tending  to  degrade  the 
people.  It  lays  the  foundations  of  popular  civil  govern- 
ment in  religious  principle,  and  supplies  restraints 
against  wrong-doing,  which  human  government  is  in- 
capable of  supplying,  —  the  Bible  being,  in  fact,  the  text- 
book of  civil  liberty.  It  trains  the  members  of  the 
church  to  the  exercise  of  the  rights  of  sovereignty,  in 
the  management  of  their  business,  in  a  Christian  spirit  of 
charity,  forbearance,  and  deference  to  the  opinions  and 
feelings  of  others,  instead  of  a  spirit  of  wilfulness,  con- 
ceit, and  selfishness ;  a  training  which  is  of  incalculable 


vii 


value  to  any  citizen  in  a  popular  government.  Ami  it 
elevates  the  ministry  to  a  higher  class  of  duties  than 
those  belonging  to  dictation  and  coercion,  and  tends  to 
purify  and  ennoble  them. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  speak  in  commendation  of  its  in- 
Huence  upon  the  character  and  destiny  of  this  country. 
The  Cambridge  Platform,  notwithstanding  the  defect 
noticed  by  you,  preserved  the  essence  of  popular  sov- 
ereignty, by  leaving  not  only  the  choice  of  officers,  but 
the  admission,  discipline,  and  expulsion  of  members,  and 
maintaining  fellowship  with  "  neighbor  churches,"  and, 
indeed,  all  the  business  of  the  church,  in  the  hands  of  the 
people ;  but,  unfortunately,  in  later  times  there  arose,  in 
the  minds  of  some  of  the  influential  ministers,  a  want  of 
confidence  in  the  capacity  of  the  people,  and  a  desire  for 
official  authority  and  dictation  ;  and  this  led  to  a  neglect  of 
instruction  as  to  the  duties  of  the  people  in  maintaining 
self-government,  and  the  spirit  in  which  these  duties 
should  be  discharged.  Experience  has  shown  that  these 
men  made  a  mistake,  and  I  believe  your  discussion  of  the 
subject  will  do  great  good. 

Yours  very  respectfully, 

R.  A.  CHAPMAN. 

Rev.  H.  M.  Dexter,  D.D. 


THE  CHDECH  POLITY  OF  THE  PILGPJMS 

THE 

POLITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


The  Plymouth  Pilgrims  were  stigmatized 
as  "  Brownists  ;  "  but  the  careful  student  of 
their  actual  belief  and  practice  will  more 
likely  conclude,  not  only  that  they  were  Con- 
gregationalists,  but  that  the  current  Congre- 
gationalism of  the  United  States  now  repro- 
duces much  more  exactly  that  which  they 
held,  and  which  John  Robinson  so  ably  ex- 
pounded, than  it  does  the  not  quite  semi- 
Presbyterianism  of  Cotton's  "  Keyes,"  and  of 
the  "  Cambridge  Platform."  In  the  matter  of 
what  they  called  Ruling  Elders,  and  in  some 
other  minor  details,  —  which  were  mainly  due 
to  some  disproportionate  stress  laid  by  them 
upon  certain  passages  of  Scri})ture,  upon 
which  time  and  experience    superinduced    a 


truer  exposition,  —  there  were  slight  differ- 
ences between  them  and  those  churches  of 
the  same  order  which  exist  to-day.  But,  in 
all  great  essentials,  they  and  their  spiritual 
children  are  one.  The  Articles  of  Faith  of 
Henry  Ainsworth's  Brownist  Church  at 
Amsterdam,  in  1596,  would  need  but  few 
words  of  alteration  to  make  them  fit  the 
average  needs,  and  uses,  of  the  Congrega- 
tional churches  of  to-day. 

The  difference  between  the  original  Con- 
gregationalism of  the  Massachusetts  and  the 
Plymouth  colonies  seems  to  have  been 
largely  due  to  the  fact,  that  those  who 
thought  out  the  latter,  went  to  the  Bible 
under  the  one  controlling  idea  that  the 
Church  of  England,  as  then  existing,  had  de- 
parted from  the  Word;  and  with  the  one 
controlling  purpose  to  recover,  if  possible, 
the  exact  primitive  and  apostolic  method  ; 
and  with  no  particular  bias  toward  one  re- 
sult rather  than  another:  while  the  former 
approached  the  Bible  with  the  design  of  ex- 
pounding its  teachings  indeed,  but  with  so 
decided   a   prejudice    against     the     then    so 


disreputable  Separatist  or  Brownist  views, 
that  it  was  nearly  morally  certain  that  their 
exegesis  could,  only  in  the  last  extremity  be 
driven  to  that  full  result.  And  it  was  not 
strange  that  "  the  speaking  aristocracy  in  the 
face  of  a  silent  democracy  "  of  Samuel  Stone, 
and  Cotton's  doctrine  of  the  power  of  the 
elders,  "  with  consent  of  the  brethren," 
should  have  been  resorted  to  by  them  in  the 
endeavor  to  avoid  an  immediate  plunge  into 
that  absolute  democracy,  which,  both  for 
Church  and  State,  was  as  much  an  object  of 
dread  in  those  days  in  Boston  and  the  towns 
of  the  Bay,  as  it  was  practically  trusted,  and 
found  salubrious,  in  the  humbler  and  older 
"  Old  Colony." 

That  which  is  simple,  natural,  and  unforced 
is  apt  to  abide  when  that  which  is  adroit,  and 
done  for  a  transitory  purpose,  fails  to  suit 
and  satisfy  the  exigencies  of  the  ages.  So 
that  it  is  no  strange  thing  which  lias  ha})- 
pened,  that  the  Congregational  churches  of 
New  England  have  gradually  worked  them- 
selves clear  from  the  aristocratic  elements 
which    modified  the  beginnings  of  so  many 


of  them  ;  ignored,  and  quietly  left  to  fall  into 
disuse,  the  Presbyterianish  principles  which 
found  their  way  into  the  Cambridge,  and 
which  gave  form  and  force  to  the  Saybrook, 
platform  ;  and  have  practically  come  to  their 
permanent  bearings  upon  the  solid,  earth- 
centering  roek  of  democracy,  —  never  bet- 
ter defined  than  unconsciously  in  that  won- 
derful compact  signed  in  the  cabin  of  the 
Mayflower,  as  a  combination  into  a  '^  body 
politick  for  our  better  ordering,  preservation, 
and  furtherance  of  y^  ends  [sought  therein] , 
and  by  vertue  hearof  to  enacte,  constitute, 
and  frame  such  just  &  equall  lawes,  ordi- 
ances,  acts,  constitutions,  &  offices,  from 
time  to  time,  as  shall  be  thought  most  meete 
&  convenient  for  y®  generall  good ;  —  unto 
which  we  promise  all  due  submission  and 
obedience." 

When  reduced  to  its  first  principles,  gov- 
ernment must  either  lodge  its  power  in  one 
ruler,  or  in  all  who  are  ruled,  or  —  between 
these  extremes  —  in  a  ruling  class  ;  and  so 
it  must  be  essentially  either  monarchy,  or 
democracy,    or    aristocracy.      Congregation- 


alism  is  democracy  applied  to  church  affairs. 
It  holds  Christ  to  be  supreme,  and  under  him 
it  vests  ecclesiastical  power  in  the  associated 
brotherhood  of  local  churches  ;  which  are 
bound  to  maintain  a  family  relation  of  frater- 
nity and  counsel,  yet  which  are  in  them- 
selves self-complete  and  independent. 

These  three  systems  of  polity  —  the  de- 
mocracy of  Congregationalism,  the  aristoc- 
racy of  Presbyterianism,  and  the  monarchy 
of  Episcopacy  *  —  are  scarcely  sufficiently 
alike,  either  in  princi[)les  or  processes,  to  run 
much  risk  of  being  confounded  with  each 
other  ;  so  that,  if  the  New  Testament  says 

*  ''  The  Hartford  Churchman  "  of  22d  May,  1869,  contains 
an  elaborate  argument  designed  to  prove,  that,  so  far  from  being 
a  monarchic  government.  Episcopacy  more  nearly  represents 
the  democracy  of  our  Republic  than  any  other  polity.  And 
this  because  the  Governor  of  the  Commonwealth  and  the 
Bishop  of  a  diocese  are  both  "  chosen  by  the  votes  of  their 
peers."  But  the  essential  feature  of  monarchy  is  in  the 
fitct,  that,  however  elected,  the  monarch  rules;  and  the 
essential  feature  of  republicanism  is,  that,  through  their 
elected  officers,  the  people  rule.  And  it  requires  but  the 
slightest  acquaintance  with  the  facts  to  settle  it,  on  this  rule, 
that  Episcopacy  is  not  republicanism,  whatever  else  it  may 
be ;  and  that  Congregationalism  is  republicanism  itself,  in  re- 
ligion. 


8 


any  thing  at  all  about  church  polity,  either  in 
the  way  of  describing  such  of  its  activities  as 
make  themselves  matters  of  its  history,  or  of 
laying  down  any  precepts  whatsoever  with 
regard  to  it,  it  would  seem  to  be  quite  a 
thing  impossible  that  the  careful  student  of 
it  should  be  left  in  doubt  whether  the 
churches  which  the  apostles  founded,  and  to 
whom  the  Epistles  were  addressed,  were,  in 
the  main  and  characteristically.  Congrega- 
tional, Presbyterian,  ur  Episcopal  churches. 

We  undertake  an  examination  of  the  New 
Testament  with  this  inquiry  in  mind.  We 
mean  to  glance  at  every  passage  in  it  wdiich 
casually,  or  carefully,  refers  in  any  manner  to 
church  action  and  government.  And,  if  we 
have  not  been  wholly  misled  in  our  investi- 
gations of  the  Word,  we  shall  be  conducted, 
by  such  an  examination,  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  Congregational  polity  of  our  Pilgrim 
Fathers,  which  they  reverently  deduced  from 
it,  is  the  polity  of  the  New  Testament. 


CHAPTER  I. 

CONGREGATIONALISM  IN  THE  GOSPELS. 

Now,  tlien,  we  approach  the  question,  what 
kind  of  clmrch  life  and  action,  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  is  to  be  found  suggested  in  tlie  way 
of  precept,  and  recorded  in  the  way  of  prac- 
tice, in  the  New  Testament  ?  Did  Christ,  so 
far  as  he  prompted  any  form  of  clmrch-hfe, 
prepare  the  minds  of  his  apostles  for  the  dem- 
ocratic, the  aristocratic,  or  the  monarchic 
polity  ?  And  were  those  earHest  churches, 
whose  history,  with  more  or  less  of  detail,  it 
gives  or  hints,  characterized  by  the  essential 
peculiarities  of  the  Congregational,  Presby- 
terian, or  Episcopal  systems  ?  That  is  the 
question,  —  one  would  think  susceptible  of 
easy  and  unerring  answer. 

That  answer,  it  is  fair  to  say  here,  is 
rendered  less  obvious,  however,  to  the  merely 
Enolish  reader  of  the  New  Testament  than 
it  need  be  in  a  perfectly  accurate  translation  ; 
than    it  would  have  been    if  Kinor    James's 


10 


translators  had  not  sometimes  modified 
earlier  versions  in  the  interest  of  Episcopacy, 
nor  sometimes,  without  crowding  the  sense 
harder  than  it  will  honestly  bear,  in  the  direc- 
tion of  prelacy.* 

We  propose  in  this  chapter  a  rapid  glance 
at  all  those  passages  in  the  four  Gospels 
which  make  reference,  either  in  the  way  of 

*  The  translation  by  them  of  the  word  ndaxa  {passover) 
by  "Easter"  (Actsxii:4);  of  the  word   eTnanoTnjv   {office) 
by  "  bishoprick  "    (Acts   i;   20);   of  the  word  eTr^T/coTrovf  by 
"bishop"  in  several  passages  of  the  Epistles,  when  they  had 
rendered  it  simply  "  overseers"  in  Acts  xx:  28;  of  as  many 
as  seven   different  Greek  words  {dtaranGu^  1  Cor.  vii:   17; 
KadlGTrii.a^  Tit.  i :  5,  Heb.  viii :  3 ;  Kptvu^  Acts  xvi :  4 ;  ttoleu, 
Mark  iii:  14;  raacro,  Eom.  xiii:  1;  ridrjiii^  1  Tim.  ii:  7;  and 
XstpoTOve<ji^  Acts  xiv:  23),    neither   one    of  which  properly 
signifies  what  general  readers  natm-ally  understand   by  the 
term,  by  the  phrase  "  ordain,"  —  are  examples  of  what  is  here 
meant.     So  Acts  xiv:  23  retained  in  the  English   versions, 
until  the  hand  of  Episcopal  authority  struck  it  out,  the  recog- 
nition of  the  action  of  the  membership  of  the  churches  in  the 
choice  of  their  elders.      Tyndale  (1534)  reads,  "And  when 
they  had  ordened  them  Elders  by  eleccion  in  every  congrega- 
tion."    Cranmer  (1539)  reads,  "  And  when  they  had  ordened 
them    elders    by  eleccion    in     every     congregacion."      The 
Genevan  (1557),    "  And  when  they  had  ordeined  them  elders 
by  election  in  every  church."     The  authorized  version  (1611) 
struck  out  this  reference  to  the  people,  and  made  the  act 
that  of  the  apostles  alone,  &c. 


11 


precept  or  example,  direct  or  indirect,  near  or 
remote,  to  the  subject  of  clmrcli  <j,overnment  ; 
of  course,  with  comment  of  the  most  brief 
and  condensed  description. 

And,  in  proceeding,  it  is  needful  to  remem- 
ber, that  our  Lord  left  the  work  of  finuhinfj 
to  be  done  by  the  apostles,  under  the  superin- 
tendence of  the  Holy  Spirit.  This  was  true 
in  the  vitalest  matters  of  theology.  Jesus 
planted  the  seeds,  they  ripened  the  fruit. 
It  was  necessary  for  him  to  die  before  the 
great  central  doctrine  of  the  Atonement 
could  be  seen  by  them  in  its  true  aspect,  as 
the  propitiation  for  their  sins,  and  not  for 
theirs  only,  but  also  for  the  sins  of  the  whole 
world  ;  and  before  those  other  doctrines 
which  grow  out  of  it,  and  depend  upon  it, 
could  assume  their  logical  place,  and  take  on 
their  relative  force.  So,  also,  in  the  matter 
of  the  church,  and  of  church-life,  Christ 
contented  himself  with  making  a  few  sug- 
gestions,—  commands  in  spirit  but  not  in 
form,  —  and  laying  do\rn  a  general  princi- 
ple, with  a  single  rule,  leaving  it  for  the 
apostles  to  carry  them  out  to  their  necessary 


12 


conclusions,  while  he  should  guide  them  in 
tlie  work  of  laying  church  foundations,  when 
the  time  came  for  it,  by  his  supervising 
Spirit.  As,  moreover,  the  matter  of  church 
form  must  necessarily  be  among  tliose  things 
reached,  if  readied  at  all,  only  in  the  closing 
stages  of  his  career,  we  ought  to  expect  to 
find  very  few,  if  any,  references  to  it  in  the 
four  Gospels. 

It  so  happens  that  the  first  word  which  is 
reached  in  the  harmonized  New  Testament, 
which  seems  to  have  any  flavor  of  ecciesias- 
ticism  about  it,  is  one  (Mark  iii:  14)  which 
illustrates  the  criticism  we  have  made  upon 
Kino;  James's  translators  as  sometimes,  for 
substance,  corrupting  the  text  in  the  interest 
of  Episcopacy.  They  tell  us  that  Jesus 
''  ordained  twelve,  that  they  should  be  with 
him  ;  "  and  so  forth. 

This,  if  it  were  correct,  would  not  mean 
much,  but  would  sound  about  as.  Episco- 
pal ly,  it  ought  to  sound.  The  Greek  word 
is  Ttoitco  (^poied^.  This  is  employed  four  or 
five  hmidred  times  in  the  New  Testament, 
and  always  in  the  sense  of  either  "  to  make  " 


13 


or  "  to  do,"  —  as  it  is  used  to  imply  action  as 
being  completed  or  continued.  In  no  other 
instance  does  our  common  version  translate 
it  "  ordain."  It  means  here  simply  "  to 
make  to  become  ;"  that  is,  to  appoint.  Tyn- 
dale  (A.D.  1380)  renders  it,  "And  he 
made  that  there  weren  twelue  with  hym." 
The  Genevan  version  (A.D.  1557)  gives  it, 
"  And  he  appoynted  twelue,  that  they  should 
be  with  hym."  Even  the  Romanist  Rheims 
version  (A.D.  1582)  has  it,  "  And  he  mado 
that  tvA^elue  should  be  with  him."  It  is 
curious  to  notice,  also,  in  this  connection, 
how  the  authors  of  the  common  version  else- 
where strained  another  verb  in  the  same 
direction.  They  represent  Christ  (John  xv  : 
16)  as  saying  to  the  twelve,  "  I  have  chosen 
you,  and  ordained  you,  that  ye  should  go  and 
bring  forth  fruit,"  and  so  forth.  The  Greek 
word  here  is  xldq^i  (tithemi)^  which  means 
"  to  set,"  "  to  put,"  and  so  also  "  to  put  to 
some  certain  use,"  and  hence  "  to  appoint." 
It  is  used  ninety-six  times  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  has  always  been  rendered  in  one 
of  those  senses,  or  in  one  directly  secondary 


14 


to  them,  except  here,  and  in  1  Tim.  ii :  7,  in 
both  of  which  they  have  translated  it  "  or- 
dained ;"  and  this  although  in  2  Tim.  i:  11 
precisely  the  same  Greek  words  are  made 
to  read,  "  AVhereunto  1  am  appointed  a 
preacher." 

We  find  one  class  of  texts  in  the  Evan- 
gelists, from  the  lips  of  our  Saviour,  which 
inculcates  very  strongly  the  general  princi- 
ple of  the  equal  brotherhood  of  believers. 
This  class  is  represented  by  such  passages  as 
those  (Matt,  xviii :  1-14,  Mark  ix :  33-50, 
Luke  ix :  46-50)  where  the  question  who 
should  be  greatest  was  discussed  by  the 
disciples,  and  answered  by  our  Lord's  putting 
a  little  child  in  the  midst  of  them  and  saying, 
^'  He  that  is  least  among  you  all,  the  same 
shall  be  great;"  by  those  (such  as  Matt. 
XX :  1-16)  which  declare  that  even  those 
who  come  in  at  the  eleventh  hour  shall  re- 
ceive equal  wages,  without  wrong  to  those 
who  have  borne  the  heat  and  burden  of  the 
day  ;  by  those  like  that  (Matt,  xx :  20-28, 
Mark  x :  35-45)  which  replies  to  the  request 
of  the   mother   of    Zebedee's   children,    by 


15 


teaching  that  tlie  true  primacy  is  that  of 
doing  most,  rather  than  of  ruling  most,  or 
having  most  ;  those  which  (like  Matt,  xxiii : 
1-12)  rebuke  the  assumptions  of  the  Phari- 
sees, and  the  aristocracy  of  their  spirit ;  and 
that  (John  xiii :  1-20)  which  pictures  the 
Lord  as  washing  the  disciples'  feet,  to  teach 
them  humility  and  fraternity. 

It  is  not,  of  course,  pretended  that  there 
is  any  direct  development  here  of  distinc- 
tively Congregational  teaching  ;  but  only  that 
all  this  points  that  way,  is  more  harmonious 
with  it  than  with  its  opposites,  and  is  what 
would  be  most  naturally  to  be  expected,  if 
our  Lord  had  that  system  in  mind,  as  tliat 
into  which  his  Spirit  should  eventually  guide 
believers.  We  certainly  do  maintain,  that 
when  Jesus  said  to  his  disciples,  "  The 
princes  of  the  Gentiles  exercise  dominion 
over  them,  and  they  that  are  great  exercise 
authority  upon  them  ;  but  it  shall  not  he  so 
among  you^^"*  etc. ;  and  when  he  commanded 
them,  '^  Be  not  ye  called  Rabbi,  for  one  is 
your  master,  even  Christ,  and  all  ye  are 
brethren;   neither  be    ve  called  masters,  foi- 


16 


one  is  your  master,  even  Christ,"  etc.,  he 
laid  down  a  theory  of  social  and  church  hfe 
which  it  is  next  to  impossible  to  realize,  ex- 
cept by  the  Congregational  way. 

We  next  come  to  the  one  law  which  our 
Saviour  did  enact  on  this  subject ;  and  we 
are  prepared  to  maintain  that  this  cannot  be 
kept,  in  perfect  good  faith,  by  any  other  sys- 
tem of  cliurch  order  tlian  our  own.  This 
(Matt,  xvii :  15-18)  is  tlie  permanent  stat- 
ute of  church  discipline.  "  Moreover,  if  thy 
brother  shall  trespass  against  thee,  go  and 
tell  him  his  fault  between  thee  and  him 
alone  ;  if  he  shall  hear  thee,  thou  hast  gained 
thy  brother.  But  if  he  will  not  hear  thee, 
then  take  with  thee  one  or  two  more,  that,  in 
the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses,  every 
word  may  be  established.  And  if  he  shall 
neglect  to  hear  them,  tell  it  unto  the  church; 
but,  if  he  neglect  to  hear  the  church,  let  him 
be  unto  thee  as  an  heathen  man  and  a  publi- 
can." Here  we  claim  that  the  telling  to 
the  church  (1)  cannot  be  done  under  the 
Romanist  or  Episcopal  system,  because 
neither  the  Pope,  nor  the  College  of  Cardi- 


17 


nals,  nor  any  Archbishop  or  Bench  of  Bish- 
ops, nor  General  Convention,  can  be  "  tlie 
church  "  in  the  sense  demanded  here  ;  and 
the  k)cal  congregation,  which  is  tlie  only  one 
to  whom  the  telHng  can  be  done,  is  utterly 
without  power  to  act  with  regard  to  it ;  nor 
(2)  can  it  be  done  under  the  Methodist  sys- 
tem, for  a  like  reason  ;  nor  (3)  under  the 
Presbyterian  system,  for  that  their  "judica- 
tory "  comes  in  between  the  individual  and 
the  cliurch,  and  makes  it  literally  impossible 
for  him  to  obey  Christ's  command.  "  The 
church"  (^r/.-Ahjoia  —  effles /a)  here  means  the 
local  body  of  believers  with  which  the  partv 
is  connected.  It  cannot  mean  any  thing  else. 
Even  Alford  (Dean  of  a  High  Church)  is 
constrained  to  testify  here,  "  That  ekklesia 
cannot  mean  the  church,  as  represented  by 
her  rulers,  appears  by  verses  19,  20,  where 
any  collection  of  believers  is  gifted  with  the 
power  of  deciding  such  cases."  And  he  is 
honest  enough  to  add,  "  Nothing  could  bo 
furtiier  from  the  spirit  of  our  Lord's  com- 
mand than  proceedings  in  what  are  oddlv 
enough  called  '  ecclesiastical  courts.'  "    And 

2 


18 


Lange  says,  "  The  term  ekJdesia  must  always 
be  understood  as  referring  to  the  Christian 
church,  or  to  tlie  meeting  of  beUevers, 
whether  it  be  large  or  smalL  .  .  .  Ro- 
man-Catholic interpreters  are  entirely  in 
error  in  explaining  the  passage,  '  Tell  it  to 
the  bishops.'  " 

That  this  is  the  true  exposition  of  the 
word  "  church  "  *  here  becomes  inevitable 
when  we  reflect  that  the  very  object  of 
friendly  labor  with  the  offender  by  the  mass 
of  his  neighbor  believers,  as  supplementing 
the  work  of  the  "  two  or  three,"  and  ten- 
derly aiming  to  quicken  and  guide  his  con- 
science, to  persuade  him  that  his  accusation 
is  no  mere  misjudgment  on  the  part  of  a  lit- 
tle knot  of  interested  or  })rejudiced  persons, 

*  The  Episcopalian  suggestion,  that,  when  this  was 
spoken,  there  was  no  church  in  existence,  and  Christ  must 
have  meant  the  synagogue,  which  they  insist  was  a  very  un- 
democratic institution,  overlooks  the  fact  that  Christ  was 
speaking  for  the  future,  when  churches  should  exist  ;  while 
Paul's  remark  concerning  the  man  who  had  been  excom- 
municated (2  Cor.  ii:  6),  "Sufficient  to  such  a  man  is  this 
punishment,  which  was  inflicted  by  the  many  "  (i.e.,  the  multi- 
tude of  church  members),  shows  that  Christ's  rule  was  dem- 
ocratically applied,  under  the  oversight  and  with  the  approval 
of  Paul  himself. 


19 


but  does  incieed  deserve  liis  o;mvest  reconsid- 
eration,  and  call  for  his  deepest  penitence, 
must  necessarily  become  tliwarted  by  the 
substitution  of  any  thing  resembhng  the  pro- 
cess of  a  series  of  appellant  tribunals  with  a 
remote  and  distant  judgment  upon  his  case; 
and  this  to  that  degree  as  to  be  rendered  abso- 
lutely impossible. 

We  insist,  then,  that  by  enacting,  as  the 
permanent  law  of  discipline  for  offences 
amono;  his  followers,  one  which  can  be 
thoroughly  and  loyally  carried  out  by  the 
Congregational  system,  and  cannot  be  so  ap- 
plied by  any  other,  our  Saviour  did  in  sub- 
stance ordain  the  democratic,  as  the  true 
polity  for  his  church. 

It  remains,  under  this  part  of  our  subject, 
only  to  notice  the  fact  that  the  idea  of  the 
essential  fashion  of  the  future  Christian 
church  having  been  thus  substantially  de- 
creed by  Christ,  as  we  have  seen  that  it  had 
already  been  hinted  in  spirit  by  him,  his  sub- 
sequent important  utterances  conformed 
themselves  to  the  same  conception.  This 
was  especially  the  fact  iu  (John  xvii :  1-2G) 


26 


his  last  prayer  for  his  followers ;  in  (Matt, 
xxvi:  26-29;  Mark  xiv  :  22-25;  Lukexxii: 
19,  20)  his  formula  of  institution  for  the 
Lord's  Supper ;  and  (Matt,  xxviii :  18-20  ; 
Mark  xvi :  15,  16 ;  Luke  xxiv  :  36,  49 ; 
John  XX :  21-23)  his  last  command.  With 
genuine  and  profound  respect  for  the  various 
excellences  of  our  sister  denominations,  we 
do  yet  most  earnestly  believe,  and  most 
respectfully  urge,  that  no  polity  so  fully  as 
ours  is  able  to  accord  with  and  promote  the 
spirit  of  that  divine  and  loving  oneness  and 
brotherhood  for  which  the  Saviour  prayed ; 
while  his  last  command,  addressed,  not  to 
any  hierarch,  or  bench  of  bishops,  but  to  the 
company  of  his  followers,  as  a  fraternity  of 
equal  individuals,  who  are  commanded  to  "  go 
preach,"  befits  our  system  better  than  any 
other:  and  our  churches  are  the  only  ones 
which  are  able,  with  verbal  accuracy  ex- 
actly to  copy,  in  the  Eucharist,  the  words 
and  deeds  of  its  first  institution,  as  Lispii'a- 
tion  has  preserved  them  "  for  our  learning." 
One  passage  only,  of  a  seeming  contrary 
to  all  these,  remains  to  be  examined.     It  is 


21 


that  (Matt,  xvi :  18)  in  which  Clirist  says 
to  Simon,  ''  Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this 
rock  I  will  build  my  churcli,"  etc.  At  first 
glance,  this  does  look  as  if  Peter  were  ap- 
pointed to  some  special  foundation  work  for 
the  church  above  his  brethren,  and  to  give 
some  slight  color  to  the  Romish  claim  of  the 
primacy  of  this  apostle,  continued  —  as  they 
allege  —  by  transfer  to  the  Popes  of  Home. 
It  is  an  obscure  passage,  and  has  been  very 
variously  interpreted.  Some,  like  Augus- 
tine, Jerome,  and  others,  have  referred  the 
''rock"  to  Christ  himself;  but  this  seems 
forced.  Some,  like  the  majority  of  the 
Fathers,  with  Huss  and  Luther,  have  re- 
ferred it  to  Peter's  confession  of  faith  in 
Christ's  Messiahship;  but  this  seems  scarcely 
warranted  by  the  facts  of  the  case.  Some, 
like  Origen,  have  applied  it  to  Peter  as  the 
representative  of  believers  in  general ;  but 
this  is  labored  and  unsatisfactory.  Lange 
explains  the  expression  as  generalizing,  so  to 
speak,  the  individual  Peter  into  what  might 
be  called  the  jyetrine  characteristic  of  the 
church ;    viz.,  faithfulness    of  confession,  as 


22 


first  distinctly  exhibited  by  Peter :  but  this 
seems  wire-drawn  and  fanciful.  It  remains 
frankly  to  understand  it  as  spoken  of  Peter 
himself  in  his  own  proper  person,  but  not,  in 
the  Popish  sense  of  Baronius  and  Bellarmine, 
as  investing  him  with  any  primacy  ;  nor,  with 
some  Romanists,  and  many  Protestants  like 
Bengel  and  Crusius,  of  any  speciality  in 
Peter's  work  as  an  apostle ;  but  simply  to 
understand  our  Saviour  as  saying,  "  Thou  art 
Peter  (a  rock)  ;  and  upon  this  rock-quality 
(this  boldness  and  firmness  of  character, 
this  solid  fitness  for  service  in  the  difficult 
work  of  winning  men  to  the  gospel)  I  will 
build  my  church."  And  this  interpretation, 
while  it  satisfies  the  exigences  of  the  sense, 
is  borne  out  by  the  fact  that  Peter  was  first 
to  preach  Christ  to  both  Jews  (Acts  ii :  14^ 
and  (Acts  x  :  34)  Gentiles.* 

Reasonably  considered,  then,  this  passage 

*  We  are  happy  to  have  good  Episcopal  indorsement  of 
our  judgment  of  this  text.  "  The  Hartford  Churchman  "  of  22d 
May,  1869,  in  a  free  criticism  upon  the  general  view  presented 
in  this  chapter,  was  careful  to  say  that  it  neither  had,  nor 
saw  the  need  of  having,  any  controversy  with  us  as  to  this 
explanation  of  this  passage  concerning  Peter  and  the  rock. 


23 


in  no  sense  contradicts  or  modifies  those 
teachings  of  fraternal  equahty  among  his  fol- 
lowers, which  Christ  had  before  solemnly 
announced. 

So  far,  then,  as  the  Gospels  are  concerned, 
we  maintain,  that  as  Jesus  was  the  visible  and 
only  head  of  his  church  so  long  as  he  re- 
mained on  earth,  and  besides  him  there  was 
no  superiority  and  no  ruling,  but  all  were 
brethren,  equal  in  rights,  however  unequal  in 
their  work  or  their  renown  ;  so  it  was  his 
theory  and  purpose  in  regard  to  the  subse- 
quent development  of  his  church  for  all  the 
ages,  himself  to  remain,  though  ascended,  its 
invisible  yet  real  and  only  head,  its  mem- 
bership standing  permanently  on  the  same 
broad  platform  of  essential  equality  and 
brotherhood,  and  its  otfices  being  offices  of 
service  and  not  of  ruling. 


CHAPTER  II. 

CONGREGATIONALISM     IN     THE     ACTS    OF    THE 
APOSTLES. 

Having  examined  those  hints  and  fore- 
shadowings  of  church  government  which 
are  contained  in  the  four  Gospels,  and  the 
one  fundamental  law  of  church  discipline  in 
them  laid  down  by  Christ  himself;  and 
havini!"  reached  the  conclusion  that  the 
theory  which  best  harmonizes  all,  and  the 
only  one  which  oifers  to  that  law  its  normal 
and  complete  development,  is  that  he  had 
from  the  beginning  the  democratic  polity  in 
mind,  and  intended  to  prepare  the  way  for 
its  practical  establishment,  so  soon  as,  after 
his  crucifixion  and  ascension,  the  fulness  of 
time  for  it  should  come,  — it  is  next  in  order 
to  proceed  to  an  examination  of  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles,  in  the  endeavor  to  determine 
what  kind  of  churches  under  the  guidance 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  were  actually  formed  by 
those  first  laborers,  and  what  were  their  con- 
ditions. 

24 


25 


1.  And  the  first  passage  which  we  find 
bearing  upon  the  subject  is  that  giving,  in 
the  first  chapter  (verses  15-20),  the  account 
of  the  clioice  of  an  apostle  in  place  of  Judas. 
Here  the  main  points  of  interest  are  the 
facts,  that,  although  Peter  was  spokes- 
man and  leader  of  the  eleven,  he  assumed 
no  such  primacy  as  would  fill  the  vacant 
apostolate,  nor  intimated  that  the  eleven 
collectively  had  power  to  fill  it ;  but  sub- 
mitted the  matter  to  the  whole  church  then 
present,  of  one  hundred  and  twenty  mem- 
bers, tellino;  them  that  from  those  who  were 
competent,  "  one  must  be  made "  (not 
"  ordained")  "  a  witnesse  of  his  resurexcioun 
with  us,"  as  Wicl if  rightly  translated  it ;  that 
the  churcli  then  (literally)  "  selected  to  stand 
up  as  candidates,"  two  ;  and  then,  recogniz- 
ing Christ,  who  had  chosen  all  of  the  eleven, 
to  be  their  still  existing,  though  risen.  Mas- 
ter and  Head,  they  })rayed  him  to  indicate, 
by  the  lot,  which  of  the  two  he  preferred ; 
which  resulted  in  the  designation  of  Matthias. 
There  is  no  mistaking  this.  Even  Chrysostom 
says,  "  Peter  did  every  thing  here  with  the 


26 


common  consent ;  nothing  by  his  own  will 
and  authority.  He  left  the  judgment  to  the 
muhitude,  to  secure  their  respect  to  the 
elected,  and  to  free  himself  from  every  invidi- 
ous reflection.  He  did  not  himself  appoint  the 
two  ;  it  was  the  act  of  all."  *  While  only  the 
germs  of  any  system  are  here  developed,  it 
is  clear  that  these  are  essentially  democratic 
in  their  character. 

2.  It  is  next  noticeable,  that  (ii :  1,  3,  4) 
the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  was  not  confined 
to  apostles  or  disciples,  but  was  shared  by 
every  member,  "  All  were  with  one  accord 
in  one  place  ;  "  and  "it  sat  upon  each  of 
them  ;  "  and  "  they  were  all  filled  with  the 
Holy  Ghost."  This  sounds  very  little  like 
the  language  of  the  Episcopal  church,  which 
represents  the  bishop  as  laying  his  hands  upon 
the  head  of  the  candidate  for  the  priesthood, 
saying,  ''  Receive  the  Holy  Ghost,"  but 
which  has  no  such  word  to  utter  in  the  ear 
of  its  candidates  for  confirmation,  and  the 
Lord's  table. 

3.  The  next  passage  which  attracts  atten- 

*  Horn,  ad  Act  1,  25. 


27 


tion,  as  liaviiig  indirect  relation  to  tliis  ques- 
tion of  polity,  is  that  (ii:  44,  45,  interpreted  by 
iv:  32,  34)  which  refers  to  the  social  life  of  the 
believers  in  Jerusalem,  in  the  opening  stage 
of  the  existence  of  the  Christian  church. 
They  ''  were  together ;  "  that  is,  they  met  in 
the  same  place,  —  which  is  one  radical  fea- 
ture of  a  Congregational  church,  in  distinc- 
tion from  the  Presbyterian  or  Episcopal 
theories  of  a  crreat  oro-anic  all-embracino; 
church,  which,  as  a  church,  can  never  be 
together,  but  which  can  only  meet  in  sep- 
ai-ate  congregations,  no  one  of  which  is  a 
church  by  and  in  itself;  and  they  "held 
all  things  as  common,"  which,  being  compared 
with  and  interpreted  by  the  subsequent  pas- 
sage, implies  not  community  of  goods,  as  has 
often  been  supposed,  Ijut  the  most  democratic 
sharing  of  the  i)roperty  which  they  individu- 
ally owned  with  each  other.*  No  one  called 
the  things  which  he  possessed  his  own  ;   that 

*  "  Does  this  description  of  a  community  of  goods  im- 
ply that  a  general  custom  admitting  of  no  exceptions  pre- 
vailed, so  that  every  individual  (not  indeed  compelled  by  a 
law,  but  in  a  voluntary  manner)  sol  I  all  his  real  estate,  and 
placed  the  proceeds  at  the  disposal  of  the  church?     If,  ac- 


28 


is,  no  one  retained  possession  of  his  property 
in  a  selfish,  secluding  spirit,  which  allowed 
others  no  benefit  from  it  ;  but,  on  the  con- 
trary, they  had  all  things  common,  that  is, 
employed  all  things  in  such  a  manner  as  to 
supply  the  wants  of  all.  What  we  claim 
here  is,  that  such  a  record  as  this  connects 
itself  much  more  naturally  with  our  own, 
than  with  any  antagonist  polity. 

4.  Next  we  come  (iv ;  23-33)  to  the 
action  of  Peter  and  John,  when,  for  the 
good  deed  done  to  the  impotent  man,  they  had 
been  arrested,  imprisoned,  reprimanded,  and 
dismissed.  When  thus  let  go,  they  went  "  to 
their  own  ;  "  that  is,  not  to  the  apostles  and 
disciples,  but  to  their  own  church  company  : 

cording  to  vei'se  thirty-two,  not  one  declared  that  any  of  the 
things  which  he  possessed  was  his  own,  this  language  un- 
questionably implies  that  his  proprietorship  remained  undis- 
turbed [hoc  ipso  prcesupiMsltur,  proprietatem  possessionis  non 
plane  fuisse  deletem).''^  —  Bengel,  in  loco. 

"  This  passage  can  by  no  means  be  so  interpreted  as  to 
lead  legitimately  to  the  conclusion  that  it  was  the  universal 
custom  of  the  raemb^ts  (voluntarily  observed,  indeed,  but 
still  not  neglected  in  a  single  case),  to  surrender  the  whole 
amount  of  their  real  estate  for  the  benefit  of  poor  members. 
Indeed,  the  special  case  which  is  now  adduced  leads  to  the 
opposite  conclusion."  —  Lange  {Lechler)  in  loco. 


29 


for  when  they  had  made  their  report  to  the 
churcli,  then  they  cdl  prayed,  apparently  with 
one  voice  as  well  as  one  spirit  ;  and,  when 
their  prayer  was  done,  they  were  all  filled 
with  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  (the  record  runs 
on  without  any  break)  this  "  mass  "  (to  7t)Sfio^ 
—  to pletlios)  of  believers  had  one  heart  and 
one  soul,  and  great  grace  was  upon  them 
all;  that  is,  as  Lange  (Lechler)  says,  "not 
on  the  apostles  only,  but  on  all  the  believers." 
This  procedure  was  wholly  natural,  if  sub- 
stantial Confireixationalism  was  their  tvpe  of 
church-life ;  wholly  unnatural,  if  not  almost 
incredible,  on  any  other  supposition. 

5.  The  choice  of  the  seven  helpers  (vi : 
1-6)  next  claims  our  consideration.  Diffi- 
culty arose  between  the  Hellenist  and  the 
Hebrew  portions  of  the  church,  because  of 
what  the  former  thought  an  unequal  distri- 
bution of  the  daily  dole  ;  whereupon  the 
twelve  called  together  (to  nlifto^  —  topletlios) 
the  mass  of  the  church,  stated  the  case  to 
them,  and  told  them  (1)  what  they  did  not 
desire,  —  to  leave  preaching  to  serve  tables  ; 
(2)  what  they  did  desire,  —  to  continue  to 


30 


minister  the  word ;  with  the  outo-rowincr 
proposition  to  the  church  to  choose  seven 
fit  men  to  attend  to  the  secularities.  This 
proposition  pleased  the  (to  7t)SjOog  —  to  ple- 
tJios')  mass  of  the  church  ;  and  it  selected  out 
Stephen  and  his  six  associates,  and  presented 
them  to  the  apostles,  who  set  them  apart  to 
their  work  by  prayer,  and  the  laying  their 
hands  upon  them.  This,  taken  in  all  its 
parts,  was  a  thoroughly  Congregational  pro- 
cedure ;  radically  such,  and  irreconcilable 
with  any  other  than  the  democratic  form  of 
church  government. 

6.  What  took  place  on  occasion  of  the 
first  persecution  (viii :  1-4)  is  next  in 
order.  It  immediately  followed  the  martyr- 
dom of  Stephen  ;  and  the  result  of  it  was 
to  banish  to  the  surrounding  regions  of 
Judasa,  and  to  Samaria,  even  as  far  as  to 
Phoenicia,  and  Cyprus,  and  Antioch,  the 
great  majority  of  the  members  of  the  Church 
at  Jerusalem,  with  the  exception  of  the  apos- 
tles. But  it  is  expressly  said  that  these  fleeing 
believers  "  went  everywhere  preaching  the 
word."  These  were  private  Christians,  every 


31 


one  ;  clotlit'd  with  no  ecclesiastical  function, 
and  invested  only  with  that  general  priesthood 
which  Conojreiiationalism,  in  accordance  with 
the  word  (1  Pet.  ii :  5-9),  assigns  to  all 
believers ;  and  yet  the  term  here  used  to 
designate  the  maimer  of  that  labor  is  pre- 
cisely that  {evuyye/.uw  —  euangijeUzo)  which, 
twenty-two  verses  after,  describes  the  preach- 
ing of  Peter  and  John  in  Samaria  ;  which 
Paul  employed  (1  Cor.  i  :  IT)  to  announce 
his  special  function  of  preaching  the  gospel  ; 
and  which  he  uses  nearly  twx'nty  times  in 
the  Epistles,  in  that  connection.  Nor  is  this 
all.  In  the  second  reference  to  the  same 
thing  (xi :  19,  20),  the  idea  is  repeated  in 
another  form  ;  a  synonyme  being  used  [hulco 
—  laleo)^  which  is  afterward  more  than  once 
employed  to  designate  the  preaching  of  Paul 
and  Barnabas,  as  it  had  been  before  used 
(Mark  ii  :  2),  of  the  preaching  of  Christ 
himself.  Tlius  ''  the  preaching  of  Jesus  to 
the  Greeks  in  Antioch  and  elsewhere,"  says 
Lange,  ''  was  effected  not  by  Peter,  nor  by 
any  other  apostle,  but  by  ordinary  Christians 
and  church-members."      If   these   were  all 


32 


substantially  Congregatlonalists,  this  is  a  per- 
fectly natural  record  ;  if  they  were  any  thing 
else,  it  becomes  not  merely  abnormal,  but 
surprising. 

7.  The  circumstances  connected  with 
Paul's  first  visit  to  Jerusalem  after  his  con- 
version next  (ix  :  26,  30)  invite  a  glance. 
When  Paul  reached  that  city,  he  did  not 
report  himself  to  any  primate  in  command, 
but  sought  to  join  himself  unto  the  body  of 
believers  ;  but  they,  knowing  what  he  had 
been  of  old,  and  seeming  to  fear  that  his 
alleo-ed  conversion  miojht  be  a  feint,  were 
suspicious  of  him,  and  drew  back,  until  Bar- 
nabas—  a  neighbor  by  birth,  and  who  seems 
to  have  had  a  previous  acquaintance  with 
him,  awakening  confidence  —  indorsed  him 
to  the  apostles ;  as  the  result  of  which,  all 
seem  to  have  been  satisfied.  And  yet  it  was 
"  the  brethren,"  and  not  the  apostles,  which 
"  sent  him  forth  "  to  Tarsus. 

8.  The  next  succeeding  verse  (ix  :  31). 
oflPers  one  of  those  bits  of  indirect  testimony 
which  lawyers  so  much  value.  "  Then," 
that  is  after  the  persecution  which  arose  about 


33 


Stephen  liad  subsided,  "  had  the  cJiurcJies 
rest  throughout  all  Judea  and  Galilee  and 
Samaria,"  etc.  This  was  exactly  what  would 
be  said  if  the  principles  of  Congregationalism 
were  then  recognized  and  dominant ;  it  was 
precisely  what  would  be  uiniatural,  and  in- 
deed impossible,  in  any  other  state  of  things. 
Congregationally,  every  one  of  these  local  as- 
semblies of  believers  in  those  three  provinces 
of  Palestine  was  a  church,  each  as  fully  and 
truly  so  as  any  ;  and,  in  making  reference  to 
them,  they  would  be  so  spoken  of,  as,  in  fact 
they  always  were  ;  as  witness  chapters  xiii : 
1,  XV :  4,  xviii :  22,  and  xx  :  17.  But,  by 
the  Presbyterian  or  the  Episcopal  theory, 
these  were  only  separate  branches  of  the 
ONE  CHURCH,  and  must  have  been  in  that 
way  described.  This  manner  of  speaking 
is,  moreover,  uniform.  Paul  (xv :  41)  went 
from  Antioch  after  the  contention  between 
him  and  Barnabas,  ''  through  Syria  and 
Cilicia,  confirming  tJie  churches ; "  and  as 
the  result  of  his  labors,  with  those  of  Silas 
[xvi:  5],  were  "  ^7ie  cAwrcAe^  established  in 
the  faith."     So  obvious  is  the  Congregation- 


34 


alism  of  tliis  manner  of  record,  that  the 
Roman-Catliolic  authors  of  the  Rheims  ver- 
sion (A.D.  1582)  seem  to  have  thought  it 
important  to  mis-translate  the  first  of  these 
texts,  and  rendered  it,  "  the  chvrch  truely 
throuMi  al  levvrie  and.  GaUlee  and  Samaria 
had  peace,"  etc.  But  even  they  did  not 
venture  to  tamper  with  the  other  two. 

9.  A  circumstance  connected  with  the 
preaching  of  Peter  at  the  house  of  the  pagan 
Cornehus  at  Cesarea  (x :  48)  should  not 
be  overlooked.  This  centurion  sends  for  the 
apostle  to  come  from  Joppa,  gathers  together 
his  kindred  and  friends  to  hear  him,  and,  in 
this  very  hearing,  he  and  they  so  cordially 
welcome  the  truth  by  faith  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  at  once,  and  with  Pentecostal  signs, 
was  granted  them,  —  the  only  instance  where 
it  preceded  baptism  ;  clearly  to  remove  every 
scruple  as  to  an  act  then  so  novel  as  the  re- 
ception of  pagans  to  the  Christian  church. 
Whereupon  Peter,  assuming  that  no  man 
could  forbid  the  baptism  with  water  of  those 
who  had  been  already  baptized  by  the  Spirit, 
"  gave  directions  (TtQoazdaaco  — pros-tasso, '  to 


35 


arrange  at  a  place  ')  that  they  should  be  bap- 
tized in  the  name  of  the  Lord,"  What  leans 
towards  Congregational  principles,  and  away 
from  all  hierarchal  notions,  here,  is  that 
Peter,  who  is  the  only  ''  authorized  "  official 
named  as  being  there,  did  not  baptize  these 
people  himself,  but  left  it  to  be  done  by  some 
of  the  unofficial  Christians  who  were  present 
(apparently  of  the  "  certain  brethren  from 
Joppa,"  who  had  accompanied  him)  ;  and 
that  the  fact  was  considered  of  importance 
enough  to  be  set  down. 

10.  The  controvei*sy  at  Jerusalem  which 
followed  this  baptism  of  Gentiles  (xi  :  1-18) 
next  claims  our  notice.  What  took  ])lace  at 
Cesarea  was  soon  heard  of  at  the  holy  city, 
and  excited  attention  there  ;  and,  when 
Peter  next  went  there,  it  led  to  discussion. 
Even  the  primitive  churches,  being  com- 
posed of  imperfect  men,  were  themselves 
imperfect ;  and  it  was  not  strange,  that,  in  the 
welding  of  the  new  Christian  upon  the  old 
Mosaic  dispensation,  some  who  had  been 
zealous  Jews  should  unduly  cling  to  Judaism, 
even  to  the  formation  of  a  party   "  of  the 


36 


circumcision  "  in  the  church  at  Jerusalem. 
This  party  were  dissatisfied  with  Peter's 
report  of  what  he  liad  done,  and  contended 
with  him  for  so  disregarding  the  old  Mosaic 
law  as  to  eat  with  uncircumcised  heathen. 
Justice  to  them  requires  the  remark,  that  it 
does  not  seem  to  have  troubled  them  that 
Peter  had  evangelized  Gentiles,  but  only 
that  he  had  not  first  Jndaized  them  by  cir- 
cumcision, before  Christianizing  them  by 
baptism.  Peter  replied  by  a  frank  statement 
of  the  way  in  whicli  his  own  scraples  had 
been  removed  by  his  vision  at  Joppa,  and 
by  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Spirit  at  Cesarea. 
This  quieted  all  opposition,  not  merely,  but 
excited  the  whole  church  to  praise  God  that 
the  gospel  door  of  hope  had  been  opened 
to  the  heathen,  as  well  as  to  the  Jews. 
Here,  now,  is  no  symptom  of  hierarchy,  but 
every  token  of  democratic  brotherhood,  and 
even  of  apostolic  accountability  to  the  asso- 
ciated body  of  believers.* 

*  "  The  Hartford  Churchman  "  says  on  this  statement  of 
ours,  "  As  the  '  primitive  churclies '  were  '  composed  of  imper- 
fect men,'  they,  in  a  very  Congregational  way,  toolv  exception 


37 


11.  Next  we  have  (xi :  22)  tlie  sending 
of  Barnabas  to  Antioch,  on  receipt  at  Jeru- 
salem of  the  tidings  of  the  great  rehgious 
awakening  which  was  taking  place  at  this 
Greek  and  Roman  capital  of  Syria,  as  a  con- 
sequence of  the  labors  of  lay  Christians 
there.  This  sending  was  done,  not  by  the 
bishop,  nor  by  the  apostles,  but  by  (l-A-Ah^aia 
—  ekklesid)  the  whole  church  ;  another  sam- 
ple of  the  working  of  pure  primitive  Congre- 
gationalism. 

12.  Next  in  the  same  chapter  (xi :  29) 
we  find  the  record  of  the  action  of  tliese  An- 
tiochean  believers  when  the  "  2;reat  dearth  " 
took  place  subsequently  in  Judea.  Then, 
not  the  bishop  nor  the  apostles,  not  even  the 
elders,  moved  in  the  matter  ;  but  "  the  disci- 
ples, every  man  according  to  his  ability,  sent 

at  St.  Peter's  conduct  in  the  matter  of  Cornelius ;  but  ^ve 
cannot  quite  agree  that  this  act  of  the  Juclaizers  is  held  up  as 
a  model  to  us."  Our  grateful  acknowledgments  are  due  for 
this  conce-«sion  as  to  the  non-Episcopal  facts  of  this  case;  and 
we  only  need  add,  t'.iat  wh.xt  we  are  especially  searching  for 
now  is  the  fact  of  the  kind  of  polity  actually  existing  in 
apostolic  times.  That  being  settled,  we  are  willing  to  leave 
all  concerned  to  draw  their  own  inferences  as  to  how  far 
what  they  did  was  intended  to  be  "  a  model  to  us.  " 


38 


somewhat  for  aid  :  "  and  they  sent  it  "  unto 
the  brethren  ;  "  although  Barnabas  and  Saul 
placed  it  in  the  hands  of  "  the  elders,"  as 
it  was  perfectly  natural  and  Congregational 
for  them  to  do. 

13.  Next  we  come  (xiii :  1-3)  to  the 
commission  of  Barnabas  and  Saul  as  foreign 
missionaries  by  the  churcli  at  Antioch.  To 
that  church,  while  assembled  with  worship 
and  fasting,  the  Holy  Spirit  said,  "  Set  apart 
for  me  Barnabas  and  Saul,  to  the  work  to 
which  I  have  called  them."  Then  they 
fasted  and  prayed,  and  laid  their  hands  on 
them,  and  sent  them  off.  Here  the  Holy 
Spirit  spake  to  the  body  of  believers,  not  to 
any  bishop  or  primate  ;  and  the  body  obeyed 
and  acted.  Tlie  command,  says  Lange,  "  is 
not  addressed  solely  to  the  teachers,  but 
rather  to  the  whole  congregation  ;  "  and  "  the 
immediate  consecration  and  dismission  of  the 
two  men  demonstrate  tliat  the  congregation 
had  clearly  understood  the  revelation  of  the 
Spirit.  The  believers  laid  their  hands  on 
both,  commended  them  to  God,  and  sent 
them  forth." 


39 


Congruous  with  this,  and  precisely  re- 
sponsive to  it,  was  the  procedure  of  these 
men  on  their  return  from  tliis  mission. 
When,  after  their  journeys,  trials,  and  suc- 
cesses (xiv  :  27),  they  came  back  to  Antioch, 
no  mention  is  made  of  any  statement  to  any 
hierarch ;  but  we  are  told  they  called  togeth- 
er tlie  ivliole  multitude  of  the  churchy  and 
(^drayye/lo}  —  anangijello,  "  to  report  back  '') 
gave  them  an  account  of  what  tliey  liad  done, 
and  of  what  had  been  done  by  their  means. 
Could  any  thing  be  more  purely  consistent 
with  the  Congregational  way  ;  more  incon- 
sistent witli  any  other  ? 

15.  The  next  chapter  (xv :  1-31)  de- 
scribes the  consultation  at  Jerusalem.  It 
was  the  old  question  of  Judaism  up  again  at 
Antioch  ;  and  that  church,  to  reach  some 
safe  decision  upon  it,  sent  up  delegates  — 
"  Paul  and  Barnabas,  and  certain  others  " 
—  to  lay  tlie  subject  before  the  mother- 
church.  When  they  arrived,  they  were 
welcomed  by  the  church  and  by  the  apostles 
and  eklers  ;  and,  in  ''  a  congregational  meet- 
ing "    (Xan^t^),  made  a  full  report  of  their 


40 


work  among  the  Gentiles.  Then  certain 
Jiideo- Pharisaic  members  objected  against 
this  influx  of  uncircumcised  heathen  into  the 
Christian  church,  and  on  that  objection  they 
seem  to  have  adjourned.  Another  si^milar 
meeting  was  held  (Lange  says,  "  Luke  speaks 
only  of  the  apostles  and  elders ;  but  it  dis- 
tinctly appears,  from  verses  12,  22,  etc.,  that 
the  congregation  was  also  present,  not 
merely  for  the  purpose  of  listening,  but  also 
of  co-operating  in  deciding  the  question  ")  as 
the  result  of  which,  "  it  pleased  the  apostles 
and  elders,  icith  the  wliole  church^''  to  send 
delegates  to  Antioch,  bearing  a  letter  of 
advice.  That  letter  of  advice  began  by 
recognizing  the  church  as  co-ordinate  in 
power  with  the  apostles,  and  gave  the 
advice  expressly  as  having  "  seemed  good 
unto  us  being  assembled  (ofiodvfiadov  —  homo- 
thumadon^  "  all  together,")  that  is,  by  unani- 
mous vote  (so  Lange^  Bengel^  Stier^  and 
Meyer).  The  bearers  of  the  letter  went 
to  Antioch ;  but  they  gathered  the  church 
together  before  they  delivered  (to  them)  that 
epistle.      And,  after  these  messengers   had 


41 


made  their  visit,  they  were  sent  back  to 
Jerusalem  in  peace  from  '*  the  brethren." 

It  would  be  difficult  to  conceive  of  proce- 
dures more  laboriously  calculated  to  em- 
phasize the  essential  principles  of  Congrega- 
tionalism, than  these  taking  place  under  the 
eye  of  the  apostles,  and  in  the  very  presence, 
and  with  the  active  co-operation,  of  that 
James  who  is  claimed  to  have  been  the  first 
primate  of  Jerusalem. 

16.  The  letter  of  commendation  (xviii : 
27)  which  Apollos  carried  from  the  church 
at  Ephesus  to  that  at  Corinth,  was  a  Con- 
gregational one,  given,  not  by  the  Bishop, 
but  by  the  brethren. 

IT.  Paul's  sending  from  Miletus  to  the 
elders  of  the  church  at  Ephesus  (xx  :  17) 
was  a  Congregational  procedure.  It  would 
be  impossible  for  the  whole  church  at 
Ephesus  to  take  the  journey  of  some  thirty 
miles  to  meet  him,  so  he  sent  (as  we  should 
say)  for  their  pastors  and  deacons,  —  their 
chief  men  ;  and  they  responded  to  his  call. 
If  Paul  had  been  an  Episcopalian,  or  a 
Methodist,  or  a  Presbyterian,  he  would  have 


42 


used  different  language,  and  have  sent  for 
somebody  else. 

18.  And  his  address  to  them  (xx :  28) 
was  in  the  spirit  of  our  system  too.  These 
men  were  elders,  that  is  pastors,  etc.,  of  the 
churcli  at  Ephesus.  He  sent  for  them  under 
that  name.  Yet  now  he  calls  them  "  bishops," 
—  showing  that  the  only  sense  which  he  put 
upon  that  word  was  the  Congregational,  and 
not  the  hierarchal  one.  "  Take  heed,"  he 
says,  "  to  yourselves,  and  to  all  the  flock  in 
which  the  Holy  Ghost  lias  set  you  as  (^Epis- 
Iwpoiis)  BISHOPS  "  !  What  a  strange  High 
Churchman  Paul  was,  to  call  these  men 
"  bishops  "  !  —  half  a  score  (more  or  less)  of 
bishops  in  one  local  church  !  Even  Episco- 
l)alian  Dean  Alford  says,  "  The  English 
version  has  hardly  dealt  fairly  in  this  case 
with  the  sacred  text,  in  rendering  Episko- 
pons  '  overseers,'  whereas  it  ought  there,  as 
in  all  other  places,  to  have  been  '  bishops,' 
that  the  facts  of  elders  and  bishops  having  been 
originally  and  apostolically  synonymous  might 
be  apparent  to  the  ordinary  English  reader, 
which  now  it  is  not." 


19.  The  little  incidental  allusions  on  the 
journey  to  Jerusalem,  the  record  of  which 
follows,  are  alike  surcharged  with  Congrega- 
tional likelihoods.  Paul  was  ''brought  on 
his  way  "  (xxi :  5),  not  by  any  bishop  or 
potentate,  but  by  "all;"  he  "saluted" 
(xxi  :  7)  not  the  bishop  of  Ptolemais,  but 
"  the  brethren  ; ''  when,  with  his  com- 
panions, he  reached  Jerusalem  (xxi:  17), 
it  was  not  tlie  bishop,  nor  the  rector,  but 
"the  brethren,"  who  received  him  gladly ; 
and  at  Jerusalem  he  reported  not  to  James 
as  primate,  but  (xxi :  18)  to  him  with  "  all 
the  elders  ;  "  and  "  they  glorified  the  Lord," 
and  immediately  proceeded  to  make  arrange- 
ments for  subsequent  action,  when  "the 
multitude  "  should  come  together. 

20.  And  so  the  faint  traces  of  church 
order  and  life  which  show  themselves,  as, 
from  this  point  the  narrative  sweeps  into  a 
swifter  current  of  personal  Pauline  history, 
are  of  the  same  description  to  the  end. 
They  ''found  brethren  "  (xxviii  :  14),  not  a 
hierarch,  at  Puteoli;  and  (xxviii:  15)  "  the 


44 


brethren  "  came  as  far  as  Appii  Forum  and 
Tres  Tabernge  to  meet  them. 

But  these  twenty  instances  are  all  on  one 
side.  Is  there  absolutely  nothing  on  the 
other  ?  Yes :  we  have  found  exactly  five 
texts  in  the  Book  of  the  Acts,  which,  unex- 
plained, have  a  hierarchal  look  ;  and  these 
we  will  now  consider. 

1.  We  learn  (viii :  14)  that  the  apostles 
sent  Peter  and  John  unto  Samaria  to  labor. 
But  this,  in  terms,  is  fatal  to  the  Romanists' 
assumption  of  Peter's  primacy  ;  and  there  is 
no  evidence  that  the  act  was  in  any  sense  an 
ecclesiastical  one,  or  any  thing  other  than 
might  naturally  have  been  looked  for  as  the 
result  of  their  mutual  consultations,  as  to  the 
best  way  of  fulfilling  the  Lord's  last  command. 

2.  There  is  a  little  sound  of  Episcopacy 
(xii :  4)  in  our  version's  saying  "intend- 
ing, after  Easter^  to  bring  him  forth  to  the 
people."  But  this  is  a  mistranslation.  The 
Greek  is  paseha^  which  means  "  the  Pass- 
over ;  "  and  not  only  Wiclif,  but  even  the 
Rheims  version,  so  renders  it :  "  meaning 
after  the  Pasche  to  brins  him  forth." 


45 


3.  A  much  stronger  passage  (xvi :  4)  is 
that  which  makes  it  appear  that  Paul  and 
Silas,  in  their  second  tour  among  the  churches 
of  Asia  Minor,  ''  delivered  to  them  the  de- 
crees for  to  keep,  that  were  ordained  of  the 
apostles  and  elders  which  were  at  Jerusa- 
lem." But  liere,  if  not  positive  mistransla- 
tion, is  a  distortion  of  the  meaning,  in  the 
direction  of  a  hierarchy.  The  reference  is 
simply  to  the  course  of  conduct  which  the 
previous  chapter  shows  had  been  agreed  upon 
unanimously  by  the  apostles,  elders,  and 
icliole  church  at  Jerusalem.  The  word  trans- 
lated decrees  (^dogmata)  means  also  ''  ad- 
vice ;  "  *  and  such  here  it  was.  Wiclif  hit 
the  meaning  exactly  when  he  translated  it, 
"  Gave  them  to  keep  the  teachings  that  were 
judged  of  the  apostles  and  elder  men  that 
were  at  Jerusalem." 

4.  In  like  manner  the  remark  of  James, 
which  in  our  version  sounds  very  like  that 
of  a  bishop  (xv :   19),  "  Wherefore  my  sen- 

*  The  Greek  noun  doy/ia  (dogma)  is  derived  from  the 
verb  doneu  {dokeo)  to  think.  Hence  the  primary  meaning  of 
6dyfj.a  is  "  that  which  seems  true  to  one." 


46 


tenee  is,^^  Wiclif  reads,  *^  Of  which  thing  I 
judge ; ''  as  also  even  the  Romanist  Rheims 
version:  "  For  the  which  cause  I  judge  ; "  the 
real  sense  being  simply  this  :  "  Wherefore  my 
opinion  is,"  *  —  which  makes  it  a  truly  Con- 
gregational utterance  from  him.f 

5.  Tlie  only  remaining  passage,  and  the 
only  one  really  deserving  of  the  slightest 
serious  consideration,  or  demanding  any 
special  carefulness  of  exposition  for  its  cor- 
rect understanding,  is  that  (xiv  :  23)  which 
seems  to  say  of  Paul  and  Barnabas,  on  the 
first  missionary  journey,  as  they  passed 
througli  Asia  Minor,  that  "  they  had  or- 
dained them  elders  in  every  church."  But, 
whatever  the  passage  does  mean,  it  cannot 
mean  that.     Nothing  is  said  about  '^  ordina- 

*  ""Eyo)  Kplvcj^  —  l^  for  my  part,  without  dictating  to 
others,  judge,  i.e.,  decide   as   my  opinion."  —  Hackeff,  in  loco. 

t  "  The  Churchman's  comment  on  this  is,  '*  The  '  dog- 
mata' had  the  force  of  decrees,  and  icei^e  something  more 
than  *  advisory.'  "  If  any  proof  of  this  assertion  had  occurred 
to  it,  we  may  rest  assured  it  would  have  been  produced;  and 
we  are  therefore  grateful  for  this  concession  that  there  exists  "no 
better  evidence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  this  transaction,  than 
the  emphatic  opinion  of  an  Episcopalian  living  eighteen 
centuries  after ! 


47 


tion"  in  the  Greek.  It  is  declared  that  Paul 
and  Barnabas  Qietnozovi^aavxE^  —  cheirotone- 
santes,  which  means  ''  to  choose  by  voting 
with  the  hand,"  and  hence,  "  to  elect  or  ap- 
point in  any  way,")  either  themselves  elected, 
or  superintended  the  election  by  each  church, 
of  elders.  Lange  explains  it  thus :  "  The 
expression  suggests  the  thought  that  the 
apostles  may  have  appointed  and  superin- 
tended a  congregational  election."  Tyndale 
translated  it,  ''And  when  they  had  ordened 
them  elders  by  eleccion  in  every  concrrecra- 
cion."  Cranmer  (A.D.  1539)  and  the 
Geneva  version  render  it  in  the  same  way. 
But  King  James's  translators,  in  the  interest 
of  Episcopacy,  left  out  the  vital  words,  "  by 
election."  If,  now,  we  read  it  as  they  did, 
we  put  a  hierarchal  sense  upon  the  sentence 
which  is  not  honest,  and  we  throw  the  verse 
out  of  all  natural  connection  with  the  sys- 
tem of  church  affairs  then  prevailing  —  if  we 
take  the  testimony  of  tlie  entire  remainder 
of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  If  we  even 
read  it  "  appointed  "  elders,  we  commit  Paul 
and  Barnabas  to  a  course  nowhere  else  hinted 


48 


at.  But  if  we  read  it  "  superintended  the 
eleetmi  of  elders  in  every  church,"  we  treat 
the  verb  fairly  as  to  its  etymology  and  his- 
tory, and  we  translate  the  text  into  symmetry 
with  the  entire  spirit  of  the  book  in  wliich  it 
has  its  place.  Surely,  then,  no  reasonable 
exegete  can  fail  to  reach  the  result  that  we 
have  nothing  here  exceptional  to  what  we 
have  seen  to  be  the  unvarying  testimony  of 
the  book. 

There  is,  then,  for  there  can  be,  but  one 
conclusion.  The  system  of  church  polity 
existino;  in  the  beo^innino;,  and  manifestino; 
itself  through  tlie  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  was 
essential  Congregationalism.*     Not  yet  fully 


*  The  Churchman  says,  "The  whole  argument  of  The 
Congregationalist '  amounts  to  just  this :  that  the  apostles, 
whom  our  Lord  commissioned  and  sent,  were  without  power 
to  do  any  thing  but  advise;  that  they  had  no  sooner  set  about 
their  work,  than  it  was  taken  out  of  their  hands  by  the  lay 
members  whom  they  had  just  converted;  and  that  they  never 
presumed  afterwards  to  interfei-e  or  direct.  .  .  .  Such  a  thee  ry 
will  not  hold  water  for  five  seconds."  Begging  the  Church- 
man's pai'don,  and,  not  being  imraersionists,  caring  very 
little  about  the  relations  of  our  argument  to  water,  we  beg  to 
insist,  that  what  we  gather  from  the  New  Testament  is,  that 
tlie  ajjostles  were  divinely  commissioned  to  act  towards  the 
young  churches  which  they  founded,  precisely  as  a  wise  parent 


49 


developed,  its  germs  were  those  of  ecclesi- 
astical democracy,  in  sharp,  continual,  and 
irreconcilable  hostility  with  spiritual  aris- 
tocracy or  monarchy. 

acts  towards  his  children,  —  not  keep  them  under  authority 
permanently,  but  train  them  by  authority,  oversight,  advice^ 
and  ever}'  possible  influence  of  affection,  to  become,  as  soon 
as  possible,  competent  to  the  assumption  (under  God)  of  the 
entire  responsibility  of  their  own  affairs. 


CHAPTER   III. 

CONGREGATIONALISM    IN    THE     EPISTLES. 

Having  seen  how  the  foundations  of  our 
democratic  pohty  were  laid  in  the  teachings 
of  Christ  himself,  as  recorded  in  the  Gos- 
pels, and  the  structure  elaborated  by  the 
apostles  under  the  supervision  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  we  are  now  prepared  to  inquire,  in 
conclusion,  what  light,  incidental  or  direct, 
is  thrown  upon  the  subject  in  the  various 
Epistles. 

We  find  it  most  convenient  to  classify  the 
testimonies  of  the  Epistles  on  this  subject 
under  the  following  heads,  which  include 
them  all ;  viz.,  (1)  texts  wdiich  refer  to  a 
church,  or  to  churches,  in  a  way  scarcely 
explicable  except  on  the  Congregational 
theory  ;  (2)  those  which  clearly  contemplate 
and  advise  such  a  brotherhood  as  can  exist  in 
its  fulness  only  in  the  Congregational  way  ; 
(3)  those  which  seem  to  be  founded  upon 
the  supposition  that  the  churches  were  of  a 

50 


51 


democratic  character  ;  (4)  those  which  speak 
of  church  officers  in  a  manner  natural  only 
to  Congregationalism  ;  (5)  those  which  re- 
quire or  refer  to  church  action  possible  only 
to  our  polity  ;  and  (6)  those  whicli  seem  to 
suirirest  another  system,  but  which,  wlien 
justly  explained,  are  really  corroborative  of 
all  the  rest  in  suo;oi;estino;  ours. 

1.  The  use  which  is  habitually  made  of 
the  word  ty.y.h^aia  (^ekklesia^  in  the  singular 
and  plural,  is  such  as  is  consistent  only  with 
the  Congregational  doctrine  of  the  church. 
In  more  than  fifty  instances  in  the  Epistles, 
the  term  is  used  under  circumstances  clearly 
implying  a  single  congregation  of  believers. 
The  churches  at  Cenchrea,  Corinth,  Philippi, 
Laodicea,  Thessalonica,  in  the  house  of  Pris- 
cilla  and  Aquila,  in  the  house  of  Nymphas, 
and  in  the  house  of  Philemon,  are  specifically 
named,  and  one  is  implied  at  Hierapolis  ; 
besides  the  general  mention  of  the  churches 
^'  of  the  Gentiles,"  '^of  Christ,"  ''  of  God," 
''of  Galatia,"  "of  Asia,"  "of  Macedonia," 
and  ''  in  Judasa ;"  besides  more  indefinite 
allusions     to     "  the      churches,"    and     '*  all 


52 


cliurches:"  and  in  the  Apocalypse  we  read 
of  the  church  at  Ephesus,  at  Smyrna,  at 
Pergamos,  at  Thyatira,  at  Sardis,  at  Phila- 
delphia, and  at  Laodicea ;  while  these  are 
grouped,  and  written  of  collectively,  as  "  the 
seven  churches  of  Asia."  On  a  careful 
examination,  moreover,  it  becomes  obvious, 
that,  beyond  question,  some  of  these  churches 
were  so  near  that  they  might  readily  have 
been  fused  into  one,  if  it  had  not  been 
tliought  expedient  to  include  in  a  single 
church  only  those  believers  who  could  reo;u- 
larly  and  conveniently  unite  in  the  enjoyment 
of  its  privileges,  and  the  performance  of  its 
duties.  For  example,  Cenchrea  was  the  sub- 
urb and  port  of  Corinth ;  yet  there  were 
churches  at  both  places.  Hierapolis  was 
visible  from  the  theatre  of  Laodicea,  and 
Colosse  was  near,  some  think  directly  be- 
tween, them ;  while  Nymphas  appears  to 
have  lived  in  or  near  Laodicea,  and  it  is 
almost  certain  that  Philemon  was  a  resident 
of  Colosse.  So  that  there  is  the  strongest 
probability  that  these  five  churches  —  at 
Hierapolis,    Laodicea,    Colosse,    and   in   the 


53 


houses  of  Nyniphas  and  Philemon  —  were  all 
situated  within  a  very  short  distance,  proba- 
bly within  sight  of  each  other  ;  —  near 
enough,  at  least,  to  demonstrate,  by  the  fact 
of  their  individual  existence,  that  it  was  the 
aim  of  the  apostles  to  include  within  a  given 
ekJdesia,  only  those  members  who  could  well 
and  habitually  share  its  privileges,  and  carry 
on  its  labors.  This  is  not  only  Congrega- 
tionalism, but  this  employment  of  the  term 
"  church  "  is  inconsistent  with  any  other  poli- 
ty. "  Its  use,"  says  the  late  Dr.  Vaughan,  "  as 
simiifvino;  the  ministers  of  reliirion  in  distinc- 
tion  from  the  people,  or  as  embracing  all  the 
persons  professing  Christianity  in  a  province 
or  nation,  is  unknown  to  the  Sacred  Scrip- 
tures. We  read  in  the  New  Testament  of 
'  the  church  at  Jerusalem,'  the  '  church  in 
the  house  of  Priscilla  and  Aquila,'  and  of 
*  the  churches  in  Judyea,  Galatia,'  etc. ;  but 
we  meet  with  no  such  phrase  as  '  the  church 
of  Judea,'  or  '  the  church  of  Galatia.'  This 
application  of  the  term  was  reserved  until 
the   time   when    Christianity  became    estab- 


54 


lislied  as  a  part  and  parcel  of  the  kingdoms 
of  this  world.*' 

2.  We  find  in  the  Epistles  a  large  number 
of  texts  which  obviously  contemplate,  and 
seek  to  further,  precisely  such  a  spirit  of 
equal  brotherhood  and  co-working,  and  such 
mutual  responsibility,  as  are  peculiar  to  Con- 
gregationalism. Thrice  repeated  by  Paul  to 
three  different  churches  (Rom.  xii :  1-8  ;  1 
Cor.  xii :  1-31  ;  Eph.  iv  :  1-16),  was  the  gen- 
eral symbol  of  a  church  as  a  body  with 
many  members,  having  not  the  same  office 
nor  the  same  gifts ;  but  yet  with  none  less 
honorable  than  others,  or  less  essential  to  the 
general  work :  so  that  the  whole  body,  thus 
made  up  of  fraternal  parts,  maketh  increase 
by  that  which  every  joint  supplieth.  So  also 
he  commands  every  Roman  believer  (Rom. 
XV :  2)  to  "  please  his  neighbor,  for  good 
ends,  to  build  him  up."  [In  the  Pauline 
Epistles,  where  the  sense  seems  to  be  im- 
proved thereby,  we  make  use  of  the  Cony- 
beare  and  Howson  translation,  against  which 
Episcopalians  surely  ought  not  to  object.] 
He  is  persuaded  (xv  :  14),  that  they  are  able 


55 


"  of  [yourselves]  to  admonisli  one  another  ;  " 
he  exhorts  "  the  brethren  "  (xvi :  17)  to  keep 
their  eyes  upon  ''  those  who  cause  divisions, 
and  cast  stumbhng-blocks  in  tlie  way  of  others, 
contrary  to  the  teaching  which  [they]  have 
learned."  So  he  exhorts  the  Corinthian 
'•  brethren  "  (1  Cor.i :  10)  "  to  shun  disputes, 
and  have  no  divisions,  but  to  be  knit  together 
in  the  same  mind  and  the  same  judgment."  It 
is  the  onlv  blemish  which  he  su2!;o;ests  as  exist- 

^  OCT 

ing  in  the  church  at  Philippi,  that  certain  of 
its  members  were  deficient  in  lowliness  of 
mind,  and  were  thus  led  into  disputes  and 
altercations  witli  their  brethren  ;  and  so  he 
says  (ii :  2-4),  "Be  of  one  accord,  filled  with 
the  same  love,  of  one  soul,  of  one  mind. 
Do  nothing  in  a  spirit  of  intrigue  or  vanity ; 
but,  in  lowliness  of  mind,  let  each  account 
others  above  himself.  Seek  not  your  private 
ends  alone  ;  but  let  every  man  seek  likewise 
his  neighbor's  o;ood." 

He  beseeclies  "  the  holy  and  faithful 
brethren "  at  Colosse  (Coloss.  iii :  IG)  to 
"  teach  and  admonish  one  another,  in  all 
wisdom.''     Peter  told  the  Christians  of  the 


56 


churches  of  Asia  (1  Pet.  ii :  9,  10)  that 
they,  having  been  chosen  out  of  the  world, 
were  a  royal  priesthood,  a  separated  and  holy 
people,  a  purchased  company,  to  the  end 
that  they  should  publish  abroad  tlie  virtues 
and  perfections  of  God  and  Christ ;  and  (iii : 
8)  he  finally  exhorts  them  to  be  especially 
mindful  of  their  fraternity  of  spirit.  Paul 
told  the  "  brethren  "  of  the  churches  of 
Galatia  (Gal.  vi :  2)  to  "  bear  one  another's 
burdens,  and  so  fulfil  the  law  of  Christ ;  for 
if  any  man  exalts  himself,  thinking  to  be 
something  when  he  is  nothing,  he  deceives 
himself  with  vain  imaginations  ;"  and  he  ad- 
monished the  Hebrews  (xiii :  1)  to  "  let 
brotherly  love  continue  ;"  he  informed  the 
Romans  (xv  :  25,  23,  31)  that  the  brethren 
of  Macedonia  and  Achaia  had  "  willingly  un- 
dertaken to  make  a  certain  contribution  for 
the  poor  among  the  saints  in  Jerusalem  ;  "  and 
he  asked  their  prayers  that  his  service  in  car- 
rying this  contribution  might  "  be  favorably 
received "  by  the  brethren  there.  Very 
touching,  also,  is  the  declaration  of  John  (1 
John  V :  16),  —  which  implies  the  lodgement 


57 


of  responsibility  for  tliose  churcli-members 
who  wander,  not  in  any  functionary,  but  in 
the  body  of  the  brotherhood,  —  that  if  any 
brother  "  see  his  brother  sinnino;  a  sin  not 
unto  death  (that  is,  one  which  does  not  ab- 
sohitely  annul  fellowship  with  Christ,  and 
cut  off  faith  in  him),  he  shall  ask,  and  gain 
for  him  life,"  etc. 

3.  There  is  a  class  of  passages  in  the  Epis- 
tles which  seems  tacitly  to  assume  that  the 
state  of  things  was  what  it  would  naturally 
be,  only  if  these  apostolic  churches  then  ex- 
istino;  were  Conorreirational  ones.  Amono; 
these  are  the  first,  the  salutatory,  verses  of 
almost  every  Epistle.  They  are  not  addressed 
to  the  primates  of  the  churches  under  any 
name,  but  almost  always  to  the  brotherhoods 
themselves,  precisely  as  Congregational  let- 
ters-missive are  now  addressed.  That  to  the 
Romans  is  "  to  all  God's  beloved,  called  to 
be  Christians,  who  dwell  in  Rome  ;  "  the  first 
to  the  Corinthians,  "  to  the  Church  of  God 
at  Corinth  ;"  the  second,  "  to  the  Church  of 
God  which  is  in  Corinth,  and  to  all  Christians 
throughout  the  whole  Province  of  Achaia  ;  " 


that  to  the  Galatians,  "  to  the  churches  of 
Galatia  ;  "  that  to  the  Ephesians  (or,  as  many 
hold,  the  Laodiceans) ,  "  to  the  Christians 
who  are  at  Ephesus  "  [Laodicea]  ;  that  to  the 
Colossians,  "  to  the  holy  and  faithful  brethren 
in  Christ  who  are  at  Colosse  ; "  those  to  the 
Thessalonians,  "  to  the  Church  of  the  Thes- 
salonians."  The  others  were  either  more 
general  in  their  scope,  like  that  to  the  He- 
brews, which  is  rather  a  treatise  than  an 
Epistle,  and  was  addressed  to  the  class  of 
Christianized  Hebrews  as  such,  rather  than 
to  the  churches  of  which  they  were  mem- 
bers ;  and  Peter's,  which  was  a  general 
letter  to  all  who  had  "  obtained  like  precious 
faith  :  "  or  more  specific,  like  Paul's  to  Tim- 
othy, Titus,  and  Philemon, — -  with  the  single 
exception  of  that  to  the  Philippians,  which 
is  addressed  "  to  all  Christians  in  Christ  Jesus 
who  are  at  Philippi,  ^oith  the  bishops  and  dea- 
cons.'" *     The  reason    of  this  addition    does 

*  ''  It  is  singular  that  the  presbyters  and  deacons  should 
be  mentioned  separately  in  the  address  of  this  Epistle  only. 
It  has  been  suggested  that  they  had  collected  and  forwarded 
the  contribution  sent  by  Epaphroditus."  —  Conybeare  and 
Rowson,  in  loco. 


59 


not  appear ;  but  it  does  appear  that  this 
could  not  have  been  an  Episcopal  church  at 
Philippi,  or  it  would  have  had  but  one  bish- 
op ;  and  also  that  the  church  ranked  in  Paul's 
eyes  before  its  officers. 

So  Peter  appeals  to  "  the  hretliren^'  and 
seeks  (2  Pet.  iii :  1)  "  to  stir  up  [their]  pure 
minds  by  way  of  remembrance,"  when  he 
desires  to  forefend  the  cause  from  the  danirer 
of  scoffers;  and  it  is  the  "  brethren  "  whom 
he  is  addressing  when  he  says  (1  Pet.  iv  : 
11),  "  If  any  speak,  let  him  speak  as  the  ora- 
cles of  God  ;  if  any  minister,  let  him  do  it 
as  of  the  power  which  God  bestoweth."  It 
is  the  hierarchal  claim  that  Timothy  was  a 
bishop;  but  Paul  tells  him  (1  Tim.  iv :  6) 
that  "  if  he  puts  the  hretliren  in  remem- 
brance of  these  things  "  (that  is,  the  con- 
futation of  various  errorists  which  he  has 
just  been  indicating),  *'  he  will  be  a  good 
servant  of  Jesus  Christ." 

So  what  Paul  says  to  the  Thessalonlan 
church  (1  Thess.  v  :  12),  in  regard  to  the 
treatment  which  he  desires  them  to  crive 
their  elders,    or    pastors,    is    precisely  what 


60 


would  have  been  natural  on  the  Congrega- 
tional, and  to  the  last  degree  unnatural  on 
any  other,  theory.  "  I  beseech  you,  brethren, 
to  have  due  sympathy  with  those  wdio  are 
laboring  among  you  ;  who  preside  over  you 
in  the  Lord's  name,  and  keep  you  in  mind 
of  your  duty.  I  beseech  you  to  esteem 
them  very  exceedingly  In  love,  for  their 
work's  sake."  Quite  akin  in  spirit  to  this  is 
what  the  same  apostle  said  to  the  Hebrews 
(xlii:  17),  ''  Render  unto  them  that  are  your 
leaders  obedience  and  submission  ;  for  they, 
on  their  part,  watch  for  the  good  of  your 
souls,  as  those  that  must  give  account :  that 
they  may  keep  their  watch  with  joy,  and  not 
with  lamentation  ;  for  that  would  be  unprofit- 
able for  you." 

We  do  not  claim  that  these  passages  can, 
of  themselves,  establish  the  doctrine  of  the 
democracy  of  the  primitive  churches ;  only 
that  they  best  comport  with  it,  and  furnish 
collateral  evidence  of  weight,  Avhen  that  de- 
mocracy has  been  otherwise  reasonably 
proved. 

4.    The    more     direct   references    to    the 


61 


officers  of  these  churches  estabhsli  the  Con- 
gregatioiiahsm  of  these  bodies.  There  are 
only  two  orders  of  church-officers  spoken  of 
in  the  Epistles  ;  viz. :  (1)  those  who  are  in- 
discriminately called  pastors  (in  the  Apoca- 
lypse "  angels  "),  teachers,  presbyters  (or 
elders),  and  bishops  (or  overseers)  ;  (2) 
d-iacons.  Tliat  the  first  four  names  were 
difterent  designations  of  the  same  office 
appears,  first,  from  the  fact  that  the  same 
persons  are  called  (Eph.  iv  :  11)  pastors  and 
teachers  ;  that  the  elders  are  (as  1  Tim.  v  : 
17)  spoken  of  as  the  only  officers  besides 
deacons  which  the  churches  had,  and  hence 
must  be  the  same  as  those  elsewhere  called 
pastors  or  teachers ;  and  that  Paul  (Acts 
XX  :  28)  expressly  told  the  "  elders  "  of  the 
church  at  Ephesus  that  the  Holy  Ghost  had 
made  them  "  bishops  "  of  that  flock  :  while 
Paul  to  Titus  (i :  7)  says  the  "  elders  "  must  • 
be  blameless,  for  the  reason  that  "  a  bishop 
ought  to  be  blameless,"  etc. ;  showing  that 
he  had  the  same  persons  in  mind.  Then,  in 
the  second  place,  precisely  the  same  qualifi- 
cations (1  Tim.  iii :  2-7  ;  Tit.  i :   6-10)    are 


62 


demanded  of  pastors,  teachers,  elders,  and 
bishops.  In  the  third  place,  the  same  duties 
are  assigned  to  all :  (1)  to  guide  the  church 
by  counsel  and  authority  (1  Tim.  v:  17  ; 
Acts  XX :  28)  ;  (2)  to  instruct  the  church 
(1  Tim.  iii:  5;  Tit.  i:  9).  And,  in  the 
fourth  place,  the  fact  that  there  is  not  a  pas- 
sage in  the  New  Testament  which  asserts,  or 
justifies  the  assertion  of,  any  superior  func- 
tion on  the  part  of  the  bishops,  completes 
tlie  proof  that  only  two  orders  of  officers 
were  known  to  the  churches  of  the  New 
Testament,  and  that  these  were  the  pastors 
(elders,  presbyters,  bishops)  and  deacons  of 
the  Congregational  churches  of  the  present. 
Even  Peter,  wlio  was,  if  Romanists  are 
right,  the  very  chiefest  of  the  Apostles, 
says  (1  Pet.  V  :  1),  "  The  elders  which  are 
among  you  I  exhort,  ivlio  am  also  an  elders 
Lange  (Fronmiiller)  says  on  this  passage, 
"  After  the  apostolic  age,  the  offices  of 
bishop  and  elders  were  gradually  separated. 
During  the  life-time  of  the  apostles,  the 
supreme     direction    of     the     churches   was 


63 


wielded  by  tliem  ;  but   they  put  themselves 
on  a  level  with  the  elders."  * 

One  passage  in  this  connection  has  given 
unauthorized  comfort  to  our  Presbyterian 
friends  (ITim.  v:lT):  "Let  the  elders 
tliat  rule  well  be  counted  worthy  of  double 
honor,  especially  they  Avho  labor  in  the 
word  and  doctrine."  But  tliere  is  no  lan- 
eldership  here.  Lange  says,  "  No  footsteps 
are  to  be  found  in  any  New-Testament 
church  of  lay-elders  ;  nor  were  there  for 
many  hundred  years."  These  were  simply 
associate  pastors,  some  of  whom  paid  special 
attention  to  the  government  of  the  churcli, 
wliile  others  were  more  given  to  the  word 
and  doctrine.  And  Paul  commends  those 
who  performed  their  office  well,  as  being 
worthy  of  a  twofold  honor.f 

*  "  Tliese  terras  are  used  in  the  New  Testament  asequivaleut, 
—  the  former  (f~i(7K07rof)  denoting  (as  its  meaning  of  overseer 
implies)  the  duties,  the  latter  [irpeafivTepog)  the  rank,  of  the 
office."  —  Conyhenre  and  Howson^  chap.  xiii. 

t  Conybeare  and  Howson  translate  this  verse,  "  Let  the 
presbyters  who  perform  their  offices  well  be  counted  worthy 
of  a  twofold  honor;  especially  those  who  labor  in  speaking 
and  teaching." 

"No  footsteps  are  to  be  found,  in  any  Christian  church,  of 


64 


But  this  reference  to  the  two  classes  of 
pastors  and  deacons  alone,  with  the  assign- 
ment to  them  of  precisely  those  functions 
which  are  usual  to  officers  bearino;  that  name 
in  democratic  churches,  is  proof,  of  the 
very  strono-est  kind,  that  the  churches  to 
which  these  Epistles  w^ere  written  were 
democratic  churches ;  while  the  absence  of 
all  reference  to  a  hierarchy  is  incidental 
evidence  of  the  weio-htiest  character  that 
none  existed  until  after  the  canon  was  closed, 
and  our  New  Testament  was  completed  as  it 
stands. 

5.  But  perhaps  the  most  convincing  proof 
of  the  Congregationalism  of  the  primitive 
churches  which  is  furnished  by  the  Epistles, 
is  the  illustrations  which  they  give  of  the 
method  of  action  pursued  in  those  churches, 
and  in  connection  with  them.  Paul  (2  Cor. 
viii :  19)  says  that  Titus  "  had  been  chosen 


lay-elders,  nor  were  there  formany  hundred  years.  St.  Paul, 
prescribing  Timothy  how  he  should  stablish  the  church, 
passeth  immediately  from  bishops  and  ministers  of  the  word 
and  sacraments  to  deacons,  omitting  these  lay-elders,  that  are 
supposed  to  lie  in  the  midst  between  them." — Dr.  Wash- 
burn, in  Lange  (  Van  Oosterzee),  in  loco. 


65 


bj  the  churches  ''  (of  Macedonia)  to  accom- 
pany him  in  his  journey  ;  and,  farther  on 
(v.  23),  he  calls  him  and  the  unnamed 
brother  who  was  with  him,  "  the  mes- 
senwrs  of  the  churches,"  to  the  end  of  trans- 
mittino*  the  o;ift  of  the  Macedonian  churches 
to  the  church  at  Jerusalem.  This  was  a  pure- 
ly Congregational  procedure ;  and  the  attempt 
of  Bishop  Coxe,  on  the  late  occasion  of  the 
consecration  of  Dr.  Huntington,  to  dignify 
this  last  text  (which  is  the  simple  historic 
record  of  the  fact  that  the  t\yo  members  of 
the  Macedonian  churches  who  had  been 
chosen  by  those  churches  to  carry,  with 
Titus,  their  fraternal  alms  to  the  Corinth 
ians,  went  as  delegates  of  those  churches,  and, 
in  so  doing,  illustrated  and  honored  their 
Christian  profession)  into  some  kind  of  a  prop 
to  the  sj^stem  of  Episcopacy,  fell  but  little 
short  of  positive  absurdity.  "  The  persons 
are  mentioned,"  says  Lange  (Kling),  "  not 
as  sent  of  the  Lord  in  any  sense,  but  simply 

as  (^ilTtnaznloi  I'/.y.h^aiodi apostolol  ckJdesion) 

raesseuiiers     of    the    churches    with    refer- 
ence    to   a   single     benevolent    mission,    or 

5 


journey.  It  can  surely  have  no  reference 
here  to  a  permanent  office,  and  is  used  sim- 
ply as  a  common  noun." 

So  Paul's  hint  of  the  method  of  Timothy's 
setting  apart  to  his  ministerial  work  (1  Tim. 
iv  :  14)  by  "  prophecy,  with  the  laying  on  of 
the  hands  of  the  elders  '*  (7tQ£6§vT^Qiov  —  ^yres- 
buteriou  is  translated  "  elders  "  in  the  other 
two  places  in  which  it  occurs  in  the  New 
Testament,  and  it  would  make  the  sense 
clearer  so  to  translate  it  here)  is  as  precise  an 
account  of  the  way  in  which  the  thousands 
of  Congregational  ministers  now  at  their 
work  have  been  set  apart,  as  our  language 
could  give.  And,  in  like  manner,  James's 
direction  (v  :  14),  "  Is  any  sick  among  you  ? 
let  him  call  for  the  elders  of  the  church, 
and  let  them  pray  over  him,"  etc.,  whether  it 
is  to  be  taken  of  bodily,  or  of  soul  sickness, 
was  a  direction  to  the  primitive  churches 
more  consonant  with  the  Concrreo-ational, 
than  any  other  polity. 

Specially  to  be  noted,  however,  are  the 
directions  in  regard  to  church  discipline 
which  the  Epistles  contain,  which  agree  with 


67 


what  we  have  seen  before  to  be  the  law  of 
Christ,  and  which  precisely  accord  with  the 
Congregational  way,  but  have  no  con- 
cjruitv  with  anv  other.  Paul  directs  Titus 
(iii :  10)  to  "put  the  brethren  in  mind,'* 
amon<r  other  thino;s,  after  one  and  a 
second  admonition,  to  reject  an  heretical 
man.  And  he  directed  "  the  brethren  "  of 
the  Church  of  the  Thessalonians  (2  Thess. 
iii  :  6)  "  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  to  withdraw  [themselves]  from  every 
brother  who  walks  disorderly  ;  "  and  (verses 
14,  15),  "  if  any  man  be  disobedient  to 
my  written  word,  to  mark  that  man,  and 
cease  from  intercourse  with  him,  that  he 
mio;ht  be  brouo;ht  to  shame  ;  but  to  count 
him  not  as  an  enemy,  but  admonish  him  as  a 
brother,"  —  counsel  which  fits  the  Congre- 
gational interpretation  of  Christ's  law  of 
church  discipline,  with  absolute  exactness. 

Moreover,  Paul  gives  the  Corinthians  ex- 
plicit instructions  in  the  same  line  of  proce- 
dure (1  Cor.  V  :  4,  5, 13),  and  directs  them, 
when  feathered  tooiether  in  the  church  as- 
sembly  in  the  name   of  the  Lord  Jesus,  to 


68 


deliver  over  to  Satan  a  certain  gross  of- 
fender, "  that  his  spirit  may  be  saved  in  the 
day  of  the  Lord  Jesus  ;  "  and  adds,  ''  From 
amongst  yourselves  ye  shall  cast  out  the  evil 
person."  And,  in  his  Second  Epistle  (ii :  6), 
he  refers  back  to  the  same  case,  and  to  the 
church's  compliance  with  his  command,  and 
says,  ''  For  the  offender  himself,  this  punish- 
ment, which  has  been  inflicted  on  Mm  by  the 
sentence  of  the  majority^''  (so  Conybeare  and 
Howson),*  is  sufficient  without  increasing 
it."  We  undertake  to  say  that  it  is  simply 
impossible  for  our  Episcopalian,  Methodist, 
or  Presbyterian  brethren  to  harmonize  this 
act  of  the  majority  of  the  brethren  of  the 
church  at  Corinth  —  which  was  exactly  the 
carrying-out  of  the  rule  of  the  eighteenth  of 
Matthew,  and  which  Paul  first  advised,  and 
then  comments  on  as  "sufficient"  —  with 
their  theories,  or  practice,  of  church  govern- 
ment. 

6.  It  remains  only  to  glance,  in  conclusion, 

*  "  The  TTlelovEg^  by  whom  the  punishment  had  been  In- 
flicted, could  not  have  been  the  eldership,  but  the  majority 
of  the  church  at  Corinth."  —  Lange  {Kling),  in  loco. 


69 


at  a  cluster  of  two  or  three  texts,  whicli  ap- 
pear to  contain  some  hierarcliic  leaning, 
that  we  may  see  how  entirely,  after  all,  those 
passages  coincide  in  spirit  with  all  that  have 
been  already  examined. 

One  (1  Cor.  vii :  17)  our  version  trans- 
lates, "  And  so  ordain  I  in  all  churches." 
This  seems  to  put  Paul  into  a  position  of 
primacy,  which  he  never  dreamed  of  claim- 
ing. What  he  said  was,  "  So  (^diaidaoo^ai 
—  diatassomai)  in  all  the  churches."  "  Dia- 
tassomaV^  means  simply  "  to  put  in  order," 
"  to  arrange."  *  It  is  the  same  verb  which 
he  used  (1  Cor.  xi :  34)  to  express  ''  The 
rest  will  I  set  in  order  when  I  come."  And 
it  means  here  simply,  "  That  is  the  arrange- 
ment whicli  I  favor,  in  all  the  churches." 
Wyclif  renders  it,  "  As  I  teche  in  alle 
chirchis  ;  "  and  even  the  Romanist  Rheims' 
translators  give  it,  "  As  in  al  churches  I 
teach."      Our  version  distorts  the  same  verb 

*  Lange  (KUng)  thus  amends  the  translation  of  the  same 
verb  in  another  place  of  the  same  epistle  (xvi:  1):  "Now, 
concerning  the  collection  for  the  saints,  as  I  have  given  or- 
der to  {arranged throughout,  —  diera^a)  the  churches  of  Gala- 
tia,  even  so  do  ve." 


70 


with  the  hke  impropriety,  in  another  text 
also  (1  Cor.  xvi :  1),  where  Paul  is  made  to 
say,  "  As  I  have  given  order  to  the  churches 
of  Galatia."  Its  meaning  there  is  the  sane 
as  here. 

Another  passage  is  (1  Cor.  xi :  2)  where 
Paul  is  represented  by  our  version  to  com- 
mand, "  Keep  the  ordinances^  as  I  delivered 
them  to  you  ;  "  which  has  a  look  of  authority, 
as  of  a  ruling  outside  of  the  church.  The 
Greek  word  here  is  TZaQadooeig  — ■  para- 
doseis,  which  is  used  thirteen  times  in  the 
New  Testament,  and  in  everi/  other  instance 
is  translated  "  traditions  ;  "  as  "  tradition 
of  the  elders,"  Mark  vii :  3,  etc.  The 
Rheims  version  renders  it  here,  "  As  I  haue 
deliuered  vnto  you,  you  keepe  my  pre- 
cepts." Tyndale,  Cranmer,  and  the  Geneva 
version  agree  together  thus  :  "  Kepe  the  ordi- 
naunces^  even  as  I  delyvered  them  to  you." 

Still  another  text  is  that  (Gal.  ii :  9) 
which  seems  to  intimate  that  "  James,  Ce- 
phas, and  John,  who  seemed  to  be  pillars," 
gave  to  Paul  and  Barnabas  the  right  hand 
of  fellowship  to  go  to  the  heathen,  as  they  to 


1 


the  circumcision  ;  as  if  with  some  showing 
of  superior  authority.  A  careful  examina- 
tion, liowever,  removes  any  such  look.  The 
tact  simply  was,  that,  as  the  result  of  mutual 
advisement  as  to  the  best  disposal  of  the 
EvangeHc  forces  at  command,  it  was  mutu- 
ally agreed  that  Paul  and  Barnabas  should 
labor  among  the  Gentiles,  and  James  and 
Peter  and  John  among  the  Jews  ;  and,  as  we 
may  colloquially  say,  "  they  shook  hands  on 
that ;  "  "  for  the  structure  of  the  Greek  seems 
to  make  the  going  of  the  one  party  to  the 
circumcision,  as  true  aud  near  a  sequence  of 
this  symbol  of  fellowship,  as  the  going  of  the 
other  to  the  heathen. 

A  class  of  passages  remains,  which,  it  has 
been  claimed,  "  recognize  an  Episcopate  as  in 
being,  and  give  directions  as  to  well-known 
acts  ;  "  such,  for  example,  as  Paul's  direction 
to  Timothy  (1  Tim.  v :  22)  to  "  lay  hands 
suddenly  on  no  man;"  of  wdiich  the 
Hartford  Churcliman  says,  "No  wa'cnching 
will  twist  these  words  into  harmony  with  the 
Congregational  system."  We  do  not  doubt 
the  honesty  with  which  this  was  said  ;  but  its 


72 


ignorance  is  marvellous  and  deplorable.  It 
is  a  part  of  the  duty  and  privilege  of  every 
Congregational  bishop  to  assist,  when  provi- 
dentially called  to  do  so,  in  that  ceremony  of 
setting  apart  to  the  ministry  on  belialf  of 
some  church,  by  which  ordination  is  effected 
now  precisely  as  it  was  when  the  like  "  gift" 
was  given  to  Timothy  himself  "  by  prophecy, 
with  the  laying-on  of  the  hands  of  the  pres- 
bytery "  (iv  :  14).  And  it  is  his  duty,  as  it 
was  Timothy's,  to  exercise  due  deliberation 
in  that  act,  and  not  hastily  and  unadvisedly 
to  assist  to  place  an  unworthy  man  in  a 
worthy  place,  and  so  become  a  "  partaker  of 
other  men's  sins."  It  is  not  easy,  from  a 
Congregational  point  of  view,  to  see  how  such 
passages  as  this  can  be  made  to  require  any 
"  wrenching,"  except  it  be  to  make  them 
usable  for  the  support  of  the  Episcopate  ; 
for  which  purpose  one  would  think  they 
ouMit  to  be  twisted  so  far  as   to   make   them 

o 

teach  that  Timothy  was  ordained  by  tlie 
hands  of  one  bishop,  and  not  of  a  whole  pres- 
bytery (equal  band)  of  pastors. 

We  are  very  ready  to  concede  that  there 


73 


are  some  texts  whicli  need  for  their  true 
miderstandino;,  a  careful  consideration  of  the 
pecuhar  rehitions  of  the  apostles  to  the 
early  churches,  and  which,  in  the  absence  of 
such  consideration,  may  seem  susceptible  of 
some  slioht  hierarchal  tino;e  and  tendency. 
Chief  among  these  is  that  (Tit.  i :  5)  in 
which  —  as  our  version  giyes  it  —  Paul  says 
to  Titus,  "  For  this  cause  left  I  thee  in  Crete  ; 
that  thou  shouldest  set  in  order  the  thino;s 
that  are  wanting,  and  ordain  elders  in  every 
city,  as  I  had  appointed  thee."  The  verse, 
literally  translated,  reads  thus :  "  For  this 
cause  (that  thou  shouldest  further  bring  into 
order  the  things  that  are  wanting  in  respect 
to  ecclesiastical  organization,  and  especially 
appoint  or  secure  the  appointment  of 
elders  in  every  city,  as  I  had  arranged  be- 
forehand) left  I  thee  in  Crete."  Now,  our 
Episcopalian  friends  insist  that  nothing  can 
do  justice  to  the  intent  and  substance  of  this 
text,  but  their  theory  that  Paul  was  a  bishop 
after  their  pattern,  and  Titus  a  bishop  of  the 
same  kind,  and  that  both  lorded  it  over  God's 
heritage  —  which  Peter  forbade  ;  instead  of 


74 


being  ensamples  to  the  flock  —  which  he  com- 
manded. 

Now,  the  Congregational  theory  provides 
for  a  special  authority,  as  well  as  leadership, 
on  the  part  of  the  apostles,  and  so  exactly 
meets  all  the  requisitions  of  these  passages  ; 
without  flying  in  the  face,  in  so  doing,  of  all 
the  rest  of  the  New  Testament,  as  the  Epis- 
copalian explanation  necessarily  does.  The 
apostles  were  missionaries,  with  an  extraordi- 
nary training,  inspiration,  and  authority, 
peculiar  to  themselves.  They  did  rule  these 
feeble  primitive  churches,  just  as  our  modern 
missionaries  have  ruled,  for  a  time,  the  infant 
churches  which  they  have  founded  on  heathen 
ground.  They  did  so  ex  necessitate  rei,  ■ — 
because  that  was  inevitable  under  the  circum- 
stances ;  just  as  the  new  settler  lives  in  a 
log-cabin  a  little  while,  not  because  that  is  his 
theory  of  domestic  architecture,  but  because 
that  is  the  best  he  can  do  for  the  first  year ; 
just  as  the  father  guides  the  tottering  steps 
of  his  first-born  in  its  amazing  initial  excur- 
sions from  one  side  of  the  room  to  the  other, 
because  that  is  the  best  way  of  teaching  it  to 


76 


walk,  and  not  because  he  proposes  to  liave  the 
child  walk  in  that  manner  at  maturity,  and 
through  life.  Paul's  directions  to  Timothy 
and  Titus  —  his  converts  —  are  almost  pre- 
cisely such  as  are  natural,  and  have  been  fre- 
quent, in  the  history  of  our  own  Congrega- 
tional missionaries  of  to-day,  in  almost  those 
same  regions.  Tlie  churches  were  wliat  we 
now  call  mission-churches,  and  their  pastors 
(elders)  were  what  we  now  call  native  i)as- 
tors.*  And,  granting  all  of  authority  which 
this  theory  naturally  brings  to  the  explana- 
tion of  the  circumstances  of  the  churches 
founded  by  the  apostles,  we  gain    apt    and 

*  Tlie  ruling  spoken  of  in  the  New  Testament  is  a  thing 
understood  in  the  mission-churches  of  our  day  (though  per- 
haps not  exactly  in  the  ancient  form),  where  pastoral  author- 
ity is  just  as  needful  in  the  infiincy  of  these  churches,  as 
parental  authority  is  in  the  early  years  of  a  family  Among 
the  churches  on  the  Hawaiian  Islands,  for  instance,  the 
missionaries  felt  it  necessary  to  exercise  authority  in  the  na- 
tive churches  for  a  course  of  years ;  and  what  of  authority 
remained  in  the  year  1863,  and  was  deemed  to  be  still  neces- 
sary, was  then  transferred  to  the  associations  and  presbytery, 
the  former  intending  to  relinquish  it  to  the  local  churche«,  as 
soon  as  the  native  pastorate  had  made  advances  to  render 
it  a  safe  deposit."  — Dr.  Rufus  Anderson  in  '■'■  Congregationalist,^^ 
4  Aug.,  1865. 


76 


abundant  explanation  of  these,  in  a  sense  ex- 
ceptional, texts,  and  do  no  violence  to  the 
essential  Congregational  spirit  which  satu- 
rates and  characterizes  the  New  Testament 
as  a  whole. 

There  is  one  remarkable  claim  which  has 
been  put  forth  by  the  Hartford  Church- 
man^ which  seems  to  deserve  a  word  of 
notice  here.  So  far  as  we  can  understand 
it,  it  amounts  to  this  ;  viz.,  that  large  parts 
of  the  "  other  thino-s  which  Jesus  did  "  — 
which  if  they  should  be  written  every  one, 
John  (xxi :  25)  suggested,  would  fill  so 
many  books  that  the  world  could  not  contain 
them —  were  oral  directions  upon  the  subject 
of  Episcopacy !  This  fulness  of  vivd  voce 
utterance  to  the  apostles,  it  thinks,  accounts 
for  the  little  that  is  put  down  in  the  New 
Testament ;  while  it  urges,  that,  being  from 
Christ,  it  is  just  as  imperative  as  the  written 
word,  and  deposited  its  force  in  the  traditions 
of  the  Church,  which  we  are  bound  to  re- 
ceive. To  this  ingenious  theory,  it  seems  to 
be  quite  sufficient  to  reply,  that  oral  utter- 
ances in  the  ears  of  the  apostles,  which  made 


77 


them  act  as  Cono-renjationalists,  —  as  we 
have  seen  in  their  Acts  and  Epistles  that 
they  did,  —  must  have  been  Congregational 
in  their  tenor  ;  so  that  if  this  argument  from 
"  tradition  "  is  worth  any  thing,  it  goes  to 
support  the  democratic,  and  not  the  hier- 
archic polity. 

This  closes  our  examination.  We  have 
passed  in  review  the  principal  allusions, 
nearer  or  more  remote,  in  the  Epistles,  to  the 
subject  of  church  government,  as  before  in 
the  Gospels  and  the  Acts.  We  have  found 
that  they  contain  references  to  the  local 
church  and  to  the  churches,  which  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  explain  unless  those  bodies  then  ex- 
istinor  were  Con^reo^ational  in  form  ;  that  thev 
clearly  contemplate  and  advise  such  a  fra- 
ternity as  can  only  be  germane  to  Congrega- 
tionalism ;  that  they,  In  many  places,  seem 
to  take  for  o;ranted  the  Coniireojationalism  of 
all  churches  ;  that  they  treat  of  church  offi- 
cers as  Congregationalists  only  naturally  and 
consistently  can  do  ;  that  they  refer  to  and 
require  church  action  which  only  Congrega- 
tionalists can   self-consistently  and  fully  per- 


78 


form  ;  and  that  the  very  few  which  seem  to 
suggest  another  system  do  so  in  appear- 
ance only,  and  are  exphcable  upon  a  theory 
wlilch  saves  their  entire  force  without  throw- 
Ino;  them  athwart  the  o;eneral  tenor  of  the 
Word. 

This,  indeed,  was  what  we  had  every 
reason  to  expect.  For  it  woukl  have  been 
surely  very  strange,  if  the  Gospels  had  re- 
corded the  foundation  laid  by  Christ  for  a 
democratic  church  government,  and  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  had  made  it  clear,  that, 
under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the 
apostles  and  early  Christians,  in  point 
of  fact,  had  established  Concrrecrational 
churches,  and  then  the  practical  letters  of 
the  same  apostles,  in  the  years  immediately 
subsequent,  had  ignored  them,  or  implied  a 
different  and  adverse  system.  It  was  most 
natural  that  it  should  be  as  it  is,  and  that 
tlie  whole  New  Testament  should  cast  its  ab- 
solute welo-ht,  without  even  the  deduction  and 
drawback  of  a  sino-le  irreconcilable  counter 
passage,  for  the  democratic  polity,  in  distinc- 
tion from,  and  in  opposition  to,  those  aristo- 


cratic  and  monarchic  corruptions  which  cam( 
in  in  subsequent  centuries,  when  the  gold  be 
came  dim,  and  the  most  fine  gold  was  changed 
and  the  world  first  invaded,  and  then  con- 
quered and  assimilated,  the  church. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

CONCLUSION. 

The  sons,  lineal  and  spiritual,  of  the 
Plymouth  men  —  the  Congregatlonalists  of 
the  present  time  in  the  United  States  —  do, 
then,  distinctly  and  broadly  claim  (as  they  in- 
tend and  hope, in  due  charity  towards  all),  tliat 
the  Pilgrim  Church  polity  is  the  polity  of  the 
New  Testament.  They  do  claim  to  be  the 
nearest  and  faithfullest  representatives  of 
the  churches  of  the  time  of  the  apostles. 

They  claim,  that  as  Jesus  Christ  was  the 
head  of  His  church  so  lono;  as  He  remained  on 
earth,  and  besides  Him  there  was  no  superi- 
ority and  no  ruling,  but  all  were  equal 
brethren,  so  it  was  His  intent  to  remain,  after 
His  ascension,  its  invisible  but  real  and  only 
ruler  ;  rulino-  throuo;h  the  influences  of  His 
Spirit  upon  the  broad  brotherhood,  whose 
offices  should  be  few  and  simple,  and  these 
for  service,  and  not  for  show  and  sway. 

They   claim    that    the    system    of  church 


81 


government  which  was  actually  dev^eloped 
under  Christ's  t)ne  law  (of  discipline)  and 
o-eneral  oversiMit,  and  throuoli  the  action 
and  (in  some  cases,  when  needful)  the 
rulino;  of  the  apostles,  is  proven  by  the 
whole  tenor  of  the  book  of  those  apostles'  Acts 
to  have  been  essentially  and  germinantly 
democratic,  in  distinction  from  spiritual  aris- 
tocracy and  monarchy. 

They  claim  that  all  this,  which  is  insepara- 
bly interwoven  with  the  entire  texture  of 
the  historic  portions  of  the  New  Testament, 
finds  natural  and  unanswerable  indorsement 
from  its  preceptive  portions,  so  that  Gospels, 
Acts,  and  Epistles,  are  one  in  the  averment 
that  that  democratic  polity  which  is  the 
Cono-reo-ationalism  of  to-dav,  and  which  the 
Brownists  rescued  and  revived  from  the  rub- 
bish of  the  dark  ages,  was  the  polity  of  the 
times,  the  events,  and  the  authors,  of  tlie  New 
Testament. 

And  so  they  believ'e  that  the  Pilgrim 
Fathers  were  entirely  right  in  the  views 
which  made  them  pray  for  the  success  of 
their  polity  in  these  terms,  — in  Gov.  Brad- 


82 


ford's  words :  "  That  the  trueth  may  pre- 
vaile,  and  the  churches  of  God  reverte  to 
their    ancient     puritie,    and     recover   their 

PRIMITIVE  ORDER,  LIBERTIE,  AND  BEWTIE." 


DATE  DUE                           1 

«««* 

<P^"' 

GAYLORD 

PRINTED  IN  US    A. 

